Emil  G.   Beck 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/crisisofchurchesOOparkrich 


THE  CRISIS 
OF  THE  CHURCHES 


THE  CRISIS 
OF  THE  CHURCHES 


BY 


LEIGHTON  PARKS,  D.b, 

RECTOR  OF  ST,   BARTHOLOMEW'S  CHURCH 
IN  THE  CITY  or  NEW  YORK 


Once  to  every  man  and  nation  comes  the  moment  to  decide." 

— ^James  Russell  Lowell. 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1922 


COPYMGHT,  1922,  BT 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 


Printed  in  United  States  of  America 


Published  March.  1922 


IN  MEM0T7TAM 


TO  THE   MEMORY  OF 
MY  GODFATHER 

WILLIAM  AUGUSTUS  MUHLENBERG,  D.D. 
A   UNIVERSAL  CHRISTIAN 


935143 


PREFACE 

I  AM  indebted  to  my  friends,  the  Rev.  Frederic  Palmer, 
D.D.,  editor  of  the  Harvard  Theological  Review,  and  the 
Rev.  Percy  Gordon,  my  associate  in  St.  Bartholomew's 
Church,  for  doing  me  the  favor  of  reading  this  book  in 
manuscript  and  making  valuable  suggestions  of  which  I 
have  availed  myself.  It  is  not,  however,  to  be  supposed 
that  they  are  responsible  for  any  part  of  this  book  or  are 
necessarily  in  agreement  with  the  opinions  therein  ex- 
pressed. My  thanks  are  also  due  to  Miss  Helen  K.  Ful- 
larton  for  reading  the  proof. 

St.  Paul  exhorted  his  readers  to  "speak  the  truth  in 
love,"  and  it  is  to  be  assumed  that  he  endeavored  to  fol- 
low that  rule  in  all  his  epistles,  but  evidently  he  did  not 
always  succeed  in  avoiding  offense.  It  will  not  be  strange 
then,  if  although  I  have  tried  in  the  following  pages  to 
speak  the  trutli  in  love,  I  too  should  give  offense  to  some 
whom  I  would  not  willingly  wound.  Moreover,  I  fear 
that  some  such  may  be  found  in  that  room  of  the  House- 
hold of  Faith  in  which  it  was  my  happy  lot  to  be  born. 
But  I  would  ask  them  to  consider  that  statements  of  facts 
to  which  attention  is  called  can  easily  be  verified  by  refer- 
ence to  the  authorities  which  are  open  to  all,  and  that  for 
this  reason  I  have  not  cumbered  the  pages  with  unneces- 
sary foot-notes;  and  that  the  opinions  herein  expressed  are 
honest  convictions,  the  result  of  many  years  of  study  and 
thought.  These  opinions  may  be,  as  I  believe  they  are, 
right;  in  which  case  I  beg  that  they  will  be  considered  dis- 
passionately and  not  condemned  offhand  because  they 
lead  to  conclusions  which  may  not  be  congenial  with  cer- 
tain theories  of  the  church  which  the  reader  may  have 
accepted  on  authority  without  careful  examination. 

vii 


viii  PREFACE 

On  the  other  hand,  they  may  be  erroneous;  in  which 
case  I  shall  rejoice  to  be  set  right;  but  this  should  not  be 
done  by  an  appeal  to  authority,  but  by  sound  reasons. 

Whether  my  readers  agree  with  me  or  not,  I  am  sure 
they  will  feel  that  the  questions  here  raised  are  worthy  of 
the  serious  consideration  of  Christian  men.  Not,  then,  in 
the  spirit  of  controversy,  but  in  the  hope  that  we  may 
find  a  way  out  of  the  difficulties  which  beset  the  church 
in  this  day  of  crisis,  I  submit  this  work  to  the  judgment  of 
religious  men  and  women.  j    p 

All  Saints*  Day, 
192 1. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPIER  PAGE 

Introduction xi 

I.    The  Crisis  of  Civilization i 

II.    The  Mission  of  the  Churches 13 

III.  The  Task  of  the  Churches 28 

IV.  Sectarianism 43 

A,  Protestant. 

V.    Sectarianism »     .  S4 

B,  Catholic. 

VI.    Organic  Unity 68 

VII.    Church  Unity 84 

VIII.    Spiritual  Unity 94 

IX.    The  English  Tradition     .......  109 

X.    The  Evolution  of  the  Ministry    .     .     .     .  125 

XI.    The  Future  Ministry 142 

Xn.    Worship 154 

XIII.  Doctrine 169 

A,    The  Faith  of  the  Church. 

XIV.  Doctrine 191 

J5.    The  Catholic  Creeds. 

XV.    Sacramentarianism 208 

XVI.    Fellowship 228 

ix 


INTRODUCTION 

It  will  be  generally  admitted,  even  by  the  most  optimis- 
tic, that  we  have  come  to  a  crisis  in  the  history  of  civiliza- 
tion. The  word  crisis  is  used  in  two  different  senses; 
sometimes  it  means  no  more  than  that  a  turning-point  has 
been  reached,  as  when,  in  speaking  of  a  disease,  it  is  said 
that  the  crisis  has  or  has  not  been  passed.  But  the  origi- 
nal meaning  of  the  word  has  a  deeper  significance  than 
that;  it  means  also  a  judgment.  This  is  what  not  a  few 
religious  men  believe  the  present  crisis  of  the  world  to  be. 
They  believe  that  it  is  the  revelation  of  God's  estimate  of 
our  civilization — the  condemnation  of  that  materialistic 
conception  of  life  which  first  poisoned  our  philosophy, 
then  our  theory  of  government,  and,  finally,  affected  all 
society,  leading  men  and  women  to  believe  that  a  man's 
life  does  consist  in  the  abundance  of  the  things  which  he 
possesses  till  there  was  nothing  left  but  to  cry:  "Let  us 
eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we  die." 

That  the  crisis  of  the  world  should  produce  a  repercus- 
sion on  the  church  was  inevitable,  but  that  the  church 
may  fail  even  if  Western  civilization  goes  down  in  ruin 
will  be  said  by  some  to  be  unthinkable.  "Have  we  not 
the  promise  of  Christ  that  *  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  pre- 
vail'? And  does  not  that  mean  that  the  church  shall 
stand  till  the  end  of  time?" 

Whether  those  are  the  words  of  Christ  himself,  or  the 
expression  of  that  exuberant  hope  of  immortal  youth  which 
filled  the  breast  of  the  church  in  the  early  days,  we  need 
not  now  consider.  Even  though  the  words  were  spoken  by 
Jesus,  the  inference  may  be  quite  different  from  what  we 
have  assumed  it  to  be.     The  church  may  remain  if  the 


xii  INTRODUCTION 

churches  fail.  And  that  means  that  the  church  of  Christ 
will  not  be  lost  even  if  every  church  now  known  to  us  were 
to  disappear.  It  is  significant  that  in  the  vision  of  the 
ideal  life,  which  he  calls  the  city  of  God,  the  seer  "saw  no 
temple  there."  But  even  if  the  words  of  the  gospel  be 
taken  in  the  traditional  sense,  it  should  be  remembered 
that  this  promise  of  Christ,  like  all  the  promises  of  God, 
is  conditional.  The  promise  to  the  Christian  church  is  no 
more  solemn  than  the  promise  to  Israel.  Israel  failed. 
Why  may  not  the  Christian  church — ^at  least  in  any  form 
with  which  we  are  familiar — also  fail? 

It  might,  then,  be  well  before  considering  the  present 
crisis  of  the  churches  to  recall  other  crises  through  which 
the  church  has  passed.  The  story  of  the  first  is  embodied 
in  the  Book  of  Jonah,  which,  because  it  begins  with  the 
incredible  story  of  the  swallowing  of  a  man  by  a  great  fish 
and  his  return  to  active  life  after  a  three  days'  entomb- 
ment in  its  belly,  has  become  the  favorite  subject  of  the 
scoffer,  but  a  more  intelligent  study  of  that  ancient  para- 
ble might  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  not  only  one  of 
the  most  precious  books  of  the  Old  Testament  but  also 
has  a  meaning  for  the  modem  church. 

Had  the  introduction  to  the  Book  of  Jonah  been  written 
by  a  Greek  it  would  appeal  to  the  modem  mind  as  the 
Hebrew  story  cannot  do.  One  of  the  Greek  myths  is  much 
like  the  Biblical  story.  When  Arion  incurred  the  wrath 
of  Apollo  he  was  cast  into  the  sea  by  the  frightened  sailors, 
but  instead  of  being  swallowed  by  a  great  fish,  he  was 
saved  by  the  grateful  dolphin,  which,  charmed  by  the 
music  of  his  lyre,  hovered  about  the  ship,  and  then  joy- 
fully carried  the  musician  on  his  back  to  the  safety  of  the 
land. 

This  is  so  evidently  a  myth  that  the  modem  mind  has 
no  difficulty  in  receiving  it  and  finding  in  it  a  poetical 
illustration  of  the  providence  which  is  wider  than  the  influ- 
ence of  any  particular  god.    But  no  Hebrew  could  have 


INTRODUCTION  xiii 

written  such  a  story.  In  the  first  place,  the  Hebrews  were 
not  a  seafaring  people  like  the  Greeks.  To  them  the  sea 
was  always  a  thing  of  terror.  The  last  of  all  the  Hebrew 
Biblical  writers  finds  comfort  in  the  thought  that  in  the 
ideal  life  ''there  shall  be  no  more  sea."  But  there  was  a 
deeper  reason  than  that:  the  Hebrew  mind,  if  not  devoid 
of  humor,  at  least  knew  nothing  of  the  playfulness  of  the 
Greek  temperament.  Humor  took  the  form  of  irony. 
Life  was  as  serious  to  the  Hebrew  as  to  his  modem  repre- 
sentative, the  Puritan.  The  eternal  God  determined  all 
things  in  heaven  and  earth  and  in  the  sea.  Jonah,  like 
Arion,  is  cast  into  the  sea,  but  no  playful  dplphin  may 
rescue  the  man  who  is  fleeing  from  Jehovah.  If  he  is  to 
be  saved,  it  must  be  by  him  whom  he  seeks  to  escape. 
The  "great  fish"  which  swallows  the  prophet  had  been 
prepared  by  God.  To  the  Greek  the  myth  was  a  joyful 
revelation;  to  the  Hebrew  it  was  a  solemn  warning. 

The  problem  of  religion  in  America  is  complicated  by 
the  fact  that  the  American  temperament  has  much  of  the 
Greek  frivolity,  and  yet  its  religion  is  permeated  by  the 
solemn  atmosphere  of  the  Hebrew.  The  result  of  this  is 
seen  in  the  different  ways  in  which  men  react  to  such  a 
story  as  that  of  Jonah  and  the  "whale."  To  the  irreverent 
it  is  a  subject  of  mockery;  to  the  deeply  religious  it  is  com- 
plicated by  the  fact  that  it  seems  to  have  received  the 
sanction  of  the  Divine  Teacher,  but  to-day  we  should  be  in 
a  position  to  study  the  book  with  a  clearer  understanding. 

The  book  itself  is  easily  understood  if  we  turn  to  it  with 
open  mind  and  ask  ourselves  what  it  was  the  writer  wished 
to  say.  He  had  in  mind  to  do  what  Bunyan  did  in  "The 
Pilgrim's  Progress."  He  was  writing  a  great  allegory.  If 
the  reader  believes  the  story  of  Christian's  fight  with  the 
dragon — ^and  who  does  not? — then  he  will  believe  in  the 
same  way  that  Jonah  was  swallowed  by  the  "whale." 

If  only  we  could  read  the  story  as  a  great  allegory,  as  it 
was  intended  to  be  read,  and  was  certainly  so  understood 


xiv  INTRODUCTION 

by  the  contemporaries  of  the  writer,  we  should  find  that  it 
has  a  much-needed  lesson  for  the  churches  to-day. 

To  us  the  story  of  the  prophet  swallowed  by  the  whale 
seems  incongruous  and  absurd,  but  to  the  men  who  first 
read  the  book  it  was  most  apposite,  for  they  knew  that 
the  experience  of  Jonah  in  the  fictitious  writing  was  a 
great  parable  of  Israel's  experience  in  the  world-wide  con- 
vulsion of  the  days  when  the  Assyrian  Empire  conquered 
the  world. 

One  of  the  results  of  the  unhappily  named  "higher  criti- 
cism"* has  been  to  show  us  when,  and  so  why,  this  book 
of  an  imknown  author  was  written.  It  was  after  the  return 
from  the  captivity,  perhaps  about  the  year  350  B.  C,  when 
Greece  was  preparing  for  her  great  invasion  of  the  East, 
which  was  destined  to  affect  the  whole  course  of  history, 
that  an  unknown  writer  had  such  an  inspiration  of  the 
needs  of  the  world  and  such  a  vision  of  Israel's  mission, 
that  the  book  known  to  us  as  "The  Prophecy  of  Jonah" 
was  given  to  the  world. 

That  Israel  should  have  returned  from  its  bitter  experi- 
ence filled  with  horror  at  the  wickedness  of  the  world  is 
not  strange;  that  men  filled  with  the  spirit  of  the  Puritan, 
as  were  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  should  feel  that  the  safety  of 
the  chosen  people  depended  upon  their  isolation,  we  can 
well  understand.  But  it  was  not  alone  the  people  who 
had  held  them  in  captivity  whose  influence  they  dreaded; 
there  were  people  near  at  hand  whom  they  despised  and 
hated.    The  Samaritans  had  played  an  unworthy  part  on 

*  Higher  criticism  is  a  name  we  owe  to  the  Germans.  It  has  aroused 
the  resentment  of  the  ignorant  because  it  seems  to  imply  a  certain 
superiority  on  the  part  of  the  critic.  But  it  refers  only  to  the  subject 
of  critical  study.  The  study  of  the  text  was  called  the  "lower"  criti- 
cism, and  the  study  of  the  book  as  a  whole — its  authorship,  the  time 
when  it  was  written,  and  the  object  of  the  writer — was  called  the 
"higher"  criticism.  Certainly  a  harmless  distinction  !  But  how  much 
bitterness  and  ignorant  zeal  might  have  been  spared  if  by  chance  the 
one  had  been  called  the  "textual"  and  the  other  the  "literary"  exam- 
ination of  Scriptures ! 


INTRODUCTION  xv 

the  return  of  their  brethren  and  sown  the  seeds  of  that 
contempt  which  was  all  the  more  bitter  because  the  rival 
religion  aped  the  manners  of  the  true  worshippers  of 
Jehovah. 

But  there  was  one  servant  of  God  who  saw  that  this 
spirit  must  lead  to  the  destruction  of  Israel,  and  that  the 
true  meaning  of  the  experience  of  the  exile  was  to  be  found 
by  those  who  had  learned  that  in  "every  nation  he  that 
reverences  and  serves  God  is  accepted  by  him."  Our 
writer  was  not  the  only  one  to  learn  this  great  truth.  The 
unknown  prophet,  whom  we  call  Isaiah,  had  had  a  vision 
of  a  God  of  the  whole  earth.  Malachi  was  about  to  say 
— ^not  as  we  read  it  in  the  authorized  version,  but — "From 
the  rising  of  the  sun  even  unto  the  going  down  of  the 
same,  my  name  is  great  among  the  heathen,  and  in  every 
place  incense  is  being  offered  unto  my  name,  even  a  pure 
offering,  for  my  name  is  now  great  among  the  heathen, 
saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts."  How  was  Israel,  hard  and  bit- 
ter and  seK-satisfied,  to  be  made  to  feel  that  its  true  mis- 
sion was  to  make  known  the  way  of  the  Lord  among  all 
people?  How  was  the  religion  of  Israel  to  be  changed 
from  a  racial  to  a  universal  religion?  How  was  the  world 
to  be  evangelized  ?  The  writer,  like  a  still  Greater  Prophet, 
turned  from  the  language  of  the  schools  and  used  the 
parable.  He  wrote  an  allegory  which  has  endured  through 
all  these  centuries  and  will  again  influence  the  world  when 
men  learn  that  it  is  a  parable  and  not  a  history. 

If  Israel  rested  content  with  the  revelation  co  the  fathers 
and  felt  no  responsibility  for  the  world,  it  would  surely 
perish.  This  was  his  message,  and  the  Book  of  Jonah  was 
the  form  it  took.  The  writer  took  for  his  hero  the  prophet 
Jonah.  Why  he  chose  this  little-known  figure  will  be  evi- 
dent to  all  who  take  the  trouble  to  make  themselves  familiar 
with  not  alone  the  history  of  Israel  as  it  is  recorded  in  the 
Scriptures  but  also  with  the  traditions  which  have  lin- 
gered to  our  day.    Jonah  was  a  great  national  hero.    Tra- 


xvi  INTRODUCTION 

dition*  said  that  he  was  the  "  child '^  whom  the  prophet 
Elijah,  at  the  time  of  the  great  famine,  raised  to  life.  He, 
said  the  popular  story,  was  the  umiamed  "servant"  who 
fled  with  Elijah  as  far  as  Beersheba,  when  the  wrath  of 
Jezebel  sought  the  prophet's  life.  He  was  the  "messen- 
ger" whom  Elisha  sent  to  anoint  Jehu  king,  which  led  to 
the  revolution  and  the  downfall  of  the  dynasty  of  Ahab. 
He,  thought  our  author,  was  a  fitting  hero  for  the  parable 
which  he  hoped  might  change  the  course  of  Hebrew  history. 

But  there  was  a  deeper  reason  still  why  Jonah  should 
have  been  the  hero  of  the  tale;  it  was  necessary  for  the 
dramatic  construction  of  the  story  that  the  hero  should 
represent  a  theology  which  Israel  had  long  outgrown. 
Every  student  of  the  Bible  knows  that  Israel  at  the  begin- 
ning conceived  of  God  as  a  tribal  God,  whose  name  was 
Jehovah.  This  God  dwelt  on  Mount  Sinai.  Thither 
Moses  went  to  receive  the  Tables  of  Stone.  To  this  same 
mountain  Elijah  went  to  renew  his  faith  in  the  God  of 
Israel.  Great  as  was  the  power  of  Jehovah,  it  was  con- 
fined to  the  Promised  Land.  His  writs  did  not  run  in 
Moab  or  in  Philistia.  It  was  not  until  the  days  of  the 
great  prophets  that  God  began  to  be  thought  of  as  the 
God  of  the  whole  earth. 

The  primiti^^e  theology  had  been  outgrown  through  the 
influence  of  the  great  prophets  and  the  experiences  in  the 
captivity.  Yet,  if  the  story  was  to  have  verisimilitude,  it 
required  for  its  hero  one  who  still  held  to  the  old  theology. 
For — and  here  lies  the  irony  of  the  writer — ^it  was  not  to 
be  supposed  that  one  who  believed  that  he  who  is  the  God 
of  the  whole  earth  could  be  content  to  have  his  true  wor- 
shippers indifferent  to  that  larger  world  in  which  he  dwelt ! 
If  God  be  the  God  of  the  whole  earth,  and  Israel  acts  as  if 
it  had  no  duty  outside  the  Promised  Land,  what  would  be 
the  fate  of  Israel?  This  is  what  the  story  of  Jonah  sets 
out  to  tell.    It  was  because  Jonah  did  not  believe  that  God 

*  See  Stanley's  "History  of  the  Jewish  Church,"  lecture  XXXIII. 


INTRODUCTION  xvii 

was  the  God  of  the  whole  earth,  but  only  of  the  sacred 
land  of  Israel,  that  when  the  unwelcome  word  of  the  Lord 
came  to  him,  saying,  "Arise,  go  to  Nineveh,"  "he  rose  up 
to  flee  unto  Tarshish  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord." 

Thus  far  there  is  nothing  in  the  allegory  which  seems 
inconsistent  with  human  experience.  But  now  follows  the 
story  which  is  not  only  incredible  but,  to  the  modern 
mind,  grotesque.  Therefore,  many  a  reader  closes  the 
story  at  this  point  and  will  read  no  more,  and  so  one  of  the 
most  instructive  and  dramatic  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  closed  to  him.  Yet,  I  venture  to  think,  the  great 
lesson  of  the  allegory  was  never  more  needed  than  to-day. 

Why  did  the  prophet  insert  such  a  grotesque  incident 
into  his  story?  Why  could  not  the  Greek  dolphin  have 
served  his  purpose?  Of  course  the  first  answer  is  that  he 
never  dreamed  that  his  parable  would  be  read  by  any  save 
his  contemporaries!  He  could  not  foresee  that  a  day 
would  come  when  the  reverence  of  a  people  for  his  writing 
would  be  so  great  that  they  would  suppose  that  he  was 
writing  history  and  would  expect  them  to  accept  his  fan- 
tastic tale  as  if  it  were  the  truth  of  a  veritable  voyage  on 
the  Mediterranean  Sea!  Yet  that  is  what  has  come  to 
pass. 

But  the  story  was  not  written  for  Christians,  nor  for 
Greeks  nor  for  Americans — full  of  imagination,  indeed,  yet 
singularly  lacking  in  the  poetic  sense.  We  are  essentially 
prosaic  in  our  most  religious  moods.  The  book  was  writ- 
ten for  the  contemporaries  of  the  prophet,  as  we  have  said, 
for  men  whose  fathers  had  known  what  it  meant  for  a 
whole  nation  to  be  engulfed  in  the  tidal  wave  of  the  Baby- 
Ionian  invasion.  The  hero  of  the  story  had  not  shared 
this  experience,  for  he  lived  before  the  rise  of  Babylon  as  a 
world-power.  He  belonged  to  the  Northern  kingdom  on 
which  the  Assyrian  "had  come  down  like  a  wolf  on  the 
fold."  It  was  Nineveh  which  had  destroyed  the  people  of 
God,  because  they  had  failed  to  preach  to  it  the  righteous- 


xviii  INTRODUCTION 

ness  of  God  which  had  been  revealed  to  them.  What  fig- 
ure should  he  use  to  represent  the  awful  fate  of  the  North- 
ern kingdom?  The  prophet  Jeremiah  had  spoken  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  as  a  dragon;  he  had  said,  speaking  of  the 
fall  of  Judea:  "The  king  of  Babylon  hath  devoured  me 
...  he  hath  swallowed  me  up  like  a  dragon  ...  he  hath 
cast  me  out." 

This,  I  guess,  is  the  seed  from  which  our  writer's  story 
grew.  Indeed,  it  would  be  more  appropriate  as  applied  to 
Nineveh  than  to  Babylon,  for  the  word  Nineveh  comes 
from  the  root  Nish,  which  means  fish.  This  was  the  great 
fish  that  swallowed  Israel.  The  people  who  first  read  this 
story  had  the  key  to  the  parable  which  we  have  lost.  They 
knew  that  the  experience  of  Jonah  was  a  parable  of  the 
experience  of  both  Israel  and  Judea.  The  great  monster 
empires  of  the  ancient  world  had  swallowed  the  people  of 
God  because  they  had  fled  from  his  presence.  And  now, 
by  the  mercy  of  God,  the  monster  had  cast  them  forth 
and  they  were  given  a  new  opportunity  to  serve  God  by 
preaching  his  righteousness  to  the  world.  Would  they 
obey  the  voice  of  God,  or  would  they  refuse?  This  was 
the  question  the  writer  had  in  mind  to  bring  before  his 
people. 

It  is  an  old  story,  but  it  is  one  which  has  a  meaning  for 
the  churches  to-day.  Indeed,  I  believe  that  it  is  the  one 
question  to  which  an  answer  must  be  found  if  the  church 
is  not  to  meet  the  fate  of  Judaism.  We  have  had  a  solemn 
warning.  Men  are  saying:  "Why  did  not  the  church  save 
the  world  from  the  desolating  war  which  threatened  to  de- 
stroy the  civilization  of  the  world?"  It  is  a  question  to 
which  an  answer  must  be  given,  and  it  ought  not  to  be 
difficult  to  find  the  answer.  The  churches  were  impotent 
because  they  had  not  used  their  influence  to  convert  the 
world.  They  were  content  to  rest  in  such  a  modification 
of  the  individual  and  family  life  as  they  had  accomplished. 
But  that  the  spiritualization  of  the  industrial  and  political 


INTRODUCTION  xix 

life  of  the  nations  and  the  relation  of  the  nations  to  one 
another  were  also  the  task  of  the  church  was  far  from  their 
thought.  The  churches  allied  to  the  state  were  bound  to 
speak  the  things  which  the  state  demanded.  The  Ameri- 
can churches,  free  from  the  control  of  the  state,  might  have 
had  a  message  to  the  world,  but  they  were  satisfied  with 
influencing  the  individual  and  were  exhausting  their  ener- 
gies in  sectarian  propaganda,  and  would  long  ago  have 
perished  had  it  not  been  that  the  Christian  spirit  was  kept 
alive  by  missions  to  the  heathen.  Who  can  doubt  that 
had  the  Christian  world  shown  to  Japan  an  example  of 
Christian  brotherhood,  the  whole  course  of  the  world  might 
have  been  changed?  If  all  the  Christian  men  and  women 
in  the  world  could  have  united  their  energies,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that  the  war  could  have  been  prevented.  I  do 
not  mean  by  some  sudden  effort  in  the  year  19 14.  That 
was  too  late.  But  if  after  the  Reformation  all  the  Re- 
formed churches  had  determined  that  they  would  no  longer 
be  dominated  by  the  spirit  of  the  world,  as  they  deter- 
mined they  would  no  longer  be  dominated  by  the  papacy, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  world  would  be  a  different 
place  from  what  it  is  to-day. 

But  the  church  has  been  impotent  because  it  lost  the 
meaning  of  the  kingdom  of  God  and  identified  salvation 
with  individual  escape  from  the  torture  of  a  hell  which  is 
to  be  experienced  after  death,  and  supposed  that  the  im- 
portant work  for  each  church  was  to  propagate  its  own 
peculiar  doctrines.  Because  of  this  the  Protestant  churches 
have  been  impotent  to  influence  the  world  except  to  a 
small  degree. 

The  churches  have  been  like  the  hero  of  our  story. 
They  have  fled  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord.  That  is, 
they  have  not  acted  as  if  they  believed  that  the  Lord  is 
present  in  the  affairs  of  the  world  but  is  confined  to  the 
sacred  soil  of  the  ecclesiastical  life.  As  a  result  of  this 
heresy  the  churches  have  been  swallowed  by  the  world. 


XX  INTRODUCTION 

There  is  a  passage  in  a  recent  book  by  Santayana  which 
deserves  our  serious  consideration.  The  liberal,  on  read- 
ing this  passage,  will,  I  think,  be  justified  in  saying  that 
the  author  is  confused  as  to  the  true  meaning  of  "author- 
ity," and  will  not  be  prepared  to  admit  that  the  picture 
which  he  draws  of  the  Protestant  churches  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  is  a  complete  portrait  of  Christian  life  in 
America  at  <that  time.  Nevertheless,  if  we  read  the  pas- 
sage with  serious  hearts,  I  think  we  shall  be  compelled  to 
admit  that  the  churches  had  substituted  efficiency  for 
holiness,  and  as  a  result  had  been  dominated  by  the  spirit 
of  the  world.  "The  Churches,  a  little  ashamed  of  their 
past,  began  to  court  the  good  opinion  of  so  excellent  a 
world.  .  .  .  They  were  far,  very  far,  from  .  .  .  preach- 
ing contempt  for  it.  .  .  .  Irreligion,  dissoluteness,  and 
pessimism — supposed  naturally  to  go  together — could 
never  prosper;  they  were  incompatible  with  efficiency. 
That  was  the  supreme  test.     *Be  Christians,'  I  once  heard 

a  president  of College  cry  to  his  assembled  pupils, 

'be  Christians  and  you  will  be  successful.'  Religion  was 
indispensable  and  sacred,  when  not  carried  too  far;  but 
theology  might  well  be  unnecessary.  Why  distract  this 
world  with  talk  of  another?  Enough  for  the  day  was  the 
good  thereof.  Religion  should  be  disentangled  as  much  as 
possible  from  history  and  authority  and  metaphysics,  and 
made  to  rest  honestly  on  one's  fine  feelings,  on  one's  indom- 
itable optimism  and  trust  in  life."* 

The  churches  have  been  swallowed  by  the  world  and 
now,  by  the  mercy  of  God,  after  the  dreadful  experience, 
are  given,  as  the  prophet  was,  a  new  opportunity  to  re- 
deem themselves.  These  are  the  conditions  which  con- 
stitute what  we  have  called  the  crisis  of  the  churches,  and 
I  venture  to  suggest  that  the  churches  to-day  are  in  the 
same  position  as  was  Jonah  after  his  deliverance  from  the 
perils  of  the  great  deep.    The  experience  of  Jonah  in  the 

*  "Character  and  Opinion  in  the  United  States,"  George  Santayana. 


INTRODUCTION  xxi 

maw  of  the  great  fish  is  the  first  act  in  our  drama.  But 
the  deeper  and  permanent  value  is  found  in  the  tragedy 
which  follows. 

The  mercy  of  God,  which  gave  to  the  rebellious  prophet 
another  opportunity  after  his  first  failure,  may  be  said  to 
have  been  shown  also  to  us.  The  churches  certainly  failed 
in  meeting  the  crisis  which  culminated  in  the  Great  War, 
but  there  is  still  work  for  them  to  do,  and,  having  been 
delivered  after  the  first  failure,  there  is  now  opening  before 
them  a  new  opportunity.  They  may  now  redeem  them- 
selves, or,  like  this  unhappy  servant  of  Jehovah,  fail  again; 
but  if  they  do,  they  will  repeat  the  tragedy  of  the  Jewish 
Church.  This  is  the  warning  of  the  second  part  of  our 
parable. 

Jonah  went  to  Nineveh  because  he  dared  not  again 
refuse.  He  delivered  the  message,  and  the  result  was  far 
dijfferent  from  what  he  had  expected.  He  had  hoped  that 
an  immediate  destruction  would  follow  his  preaching. 
But  behold,  the  city  heard  and  hearkened.  He  sat  on  the 
mound  outside  the  city  and  waited  for  the  fire  from  heaven 
to  fall.  He  heard  the  sound  of  mourning,  he  saw  the 
beasts  led  from  the  field  to  take  part  in  the  expiation. 
And  he  gloried  in  the  thought  that  it  was  too  late.* 

I  do  not  think  it  unjust  to  say  that  this  represented  the 
feeling  of  many  who  call  themselves  Christians  as  they 
contemplated  the  possibility  of  the  resurrection  of  Ger- 
many from  the  grave  of  the  Hohenzollems.  We  have 
heard  not  a  few  say  that  they  wished  the  war  had  con- 
tinued till  the  invading  armies  had  done  in  Germany  all 
that  the  Germans  had  done  in  Belgium. 

It  may  be  said  that  one  essential  element  has  been  over- 
looked: "The  people  of  Nineveh  repented.  If  the  Ger- 
mans had  repented,  we  should  have  been  the  first  to  for- 
give them."  I  believe  that  those  who  speak  thus  are 
deceiving  themselves.  They  "would  forgive  if  repentance 
*  See  Stanley's  lectures  on  the  Jewish  Church. 


xxii  INTRODUCTION 

were  evident"?  Possibly.  But  they  would  have  been 
sorry  to  have  repentance  precede  suffering!  The  man 
who  wrote  the  Book  of  Jonah  knew  the  human  heart  better 
than  many  a  man  who  knows  much  of  which  the  ancient 
writer  was  ignorant.  When  he  depicted  Jonah  sitting  in 
sullen  expectation  for  the  destruction  of  the  city,  grieving 
at  the  sound  of  repentance,  he  was  doing  what  many  a 
man  who  calls  himself  a  Christian  is  doing  to-day.  Each 
is  interested,  not  in  the  salvation  of  life,  but  in  the  fulfil- 
ment of  his  own  prophecy ! 

Again,  I  would  call  attention  to  the  artistry  of  the 
story.  The  writer  has  followed  the  path  of  human  experi- 
ence as  faithfully  as  the  broad  feet  of  Bunyan  trod  the 
well-known  paths  of  England.  Jonah  is  a  modem  figure 
— ^because  he  is  the  revelation  of  the  human  heart. 

Waiting  for  destruction  to  fall  on  those  we  hate  is  a 
wearisome  business.  Jonah  found  it  so.  He  knew  the 
evil  the  great  Assyrian  Empire  had  brought  upon  the 
world,  the  blood  it  had  shed,  the  tears  it  had  caused  to 
flow,  the  homes  it  had  broken  up,  and  so  the  cries  that 
went  up  from  the  king  on  his  throne  and  the  peasant  in 
the  field  were  as  music  in  his  ears.  Yet  the  destruction 
tarried.  At  last  it  is  borne  in  upon  him  that  his  prophecy 
has  failed.  God  is  to  be  merciful  to  those  who  deserved 
no  mercy.  Meanwhile  the  hot  Assyrian  sun  beats  down 
upon  his  unprotected  head  and  he  is  full  of  misery. 

The  Hebrew  knew  nothing  of  what  we  call  secondary 
causes.  Whatever  happened  was  the  direct  action  of  God. 
As  God  had  prepared  the  great  wind  and  the  great  fish,  so 
now  it  is  God  who  causes  a  miraculous  gourd  to  spring  up 
and  Jonah  is  comforted  by  its  refreshing  shade.  In  his 
secure  retreat  he  again  waits  for  the  fulfihnent  of  the 
prophecy  which  he  had  feared  was  to  fail.  But  at  last 
there  can  be  no  further  ground  for  hope.  The  sounds  of 
mourning  have  turned  into  hymns  of  joy,  and  he  is  com- 
pelled to  admit  that  the  wicked  city  is  to  escape  the  doom 


INTRODUCTION  xxiii 

it  merited.  And  in  bitterness  of  heart  he  lies  down  to 
sleep.  A^d  now  God  sends  a  worm  which  gnaws  the  root 
of  the  gourd  and  the  hot  wind  of  the  desert  blows  upon  it 
and  it  withers  away.  And  Jonah  is  filled  with  anger 
against  God.  Then  the  voice  of  God  comes  to  him,  as  it 
had  come  to  his  master  Elijah  on  Horeb,  saying:  "Dost 
thou  well  to  be  angry  for  the  gourd?"  And  he  answers  in 
the  bitterness  of  his  soul:  "I  do  well  to  be  angry  even  unto 
death." 

To  some  this  seems  an  impotent  conclusion.  '*What 
next?"  they  say.  But  it  is  the  proper  ending  of  a  great 
tragedy.  As  in  Hamlet,  "the  rest  is  silence."  But  the 
meaning  is  clear.  This  is  the  end  of  the  prophetic  spirit 
which  loves  its  own  shelter  more  than  the  "six  score  thou- 
sand persons  that  cannot  discern  between  their  right  hand 
and  their  left  hand;  and  also  much  cattle."  "But  who 
are  such?"  it  may  be  asked.  They  are  the  religious  sec- 
tarians, all  who  identify  the  goodness  of  God  with  the  lit- 
tle system  which  they  have  found  helpful  and  comforting. 
It  may  be  a  great  church  which  numbers  its  millions  in 
many  lands,  or  it  may  be  a  little  sect  of  only  a  few  score. 
But  the  important  matter  is  not  which  particular  body  it 
seems  to  us  is  most  to  be  condemned  for  this  spirit;  the 
important  thing  to  remember  is  that  it  is  a  spirit  from 
which  none  of  the  churches  is  entirely  free.  I  do  not  in- 
tend to  imply  that  there  is  conscious  hatred  on  the  part 
of  one  church  to  another,  but  only  that  the  logic  of  their 
theory  leads  to  a  scepticism  of  God's  goodness  outside  the 
company  to  which  they  belong. 

No  doubt  the  story  has  its  lesson  for  the  individual,  but 
it  is  primarily  a  parable  of  the  church.  It  was  addressed 
to  the  Jewish  Church,  which  had  been  swallowed  up  by  the 
great  dragons  of  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  Empires, 
but,  by  the  mercy  of  God,  had  now  been  cast  forth.  A 
new  opportunity  had  been  given  to  do  the  will  of  God  in 
making  his  way  known  among  the  Gentiles,  but  instead 


xxiv  INTRODUCTION 

of  that  the  Jews  were  filled  with  bitterness  as  they  learned 
that  God  was  interested  in  the  heathen  and  that  his  mercy 
was  "wider  than  the  wideness  of  the  sea."  Their  feeling 
hardened  into  the  Pharisaism  which  at  last  slew  a  Greater 
than  Jonah,  because  he  told  them  that  the  Good  Samari- 
tan, however  faulty  his  theology,  was  nearer  to  God  than 
the  orthodox  priest  and  Levite. 

Yet  this  tragedy  of  Israel  might  have  been  averted  had 
the  priests  listened  to  one  who  was  more  like  Jesus  in  his 
spirit  than  even  the  "greater"  prophets.  His  word  needed 
no  scribe  to  interpret  it.  It  was  as  plain  as  the  word  of 
Jesus.  "You  are  looking,"  Jesus  said,  "only  to  the  past. 
You  forget  the  present  and  have  no  eyes  for  the  future. 
You  are  on  the  threshold  of  a  great  revelation — ^just  as 
Jonah  was — and  if  you  fail  to  see  the  signs  of  the  times 
and  to  do  the  work  to  which  God  has  called  you,  your 
church  and  nation,  which  have  been  your  joy  and  com- 
fort, will  be  destroyed  as  was  the  gourd  of  Jonah,  and  your 
end,  like  his,  will  be  full  of  bitterness."  And  it  was  so. 
The  Book  of  Jonah  is  the  prophecy  of  the  fall  of  Israel — 
the  foretelling  of  the  fate  of  the  church  of  God ! 

If  that  be  all  the  book  has  to  tell  us,  it  can  have  only  an 
historical  interest.  And  that,  after  all,  has  small  value  if 
it  does  not  teach  us  how  best  to  meet  the  problems  of  our 
own  day.  If,  however,  this  same  spirit  against  which  our 
parable  is  a  protest  was  carried  over  into  the  early  Chris- 
tian church,  we  may  find  that  it  has  persisted  longer  than 
we  should  at  first  sight  be  inclined  to  think.  We  have 
only  to  open  the  New  Testament  at  random  to  find  how 
persistent  this  spirit  has  been. 

When  the  disciples  had  learned  what  Jesus  had  done  for 
them,  it  was  inevitable  that  they  should  be  tempted  to 
look  with  suspicion,  if  not  with  contempt,  on  those  who 
had  failed  to  see  his  glory.  Thus  we  are  told  that  on  one 
occasion  they  came  to  Jesus  and  complacently  remarked 
that  they  had  seen  others  "casting  out  devils  in  his  name. 


INTRODUCTION  xxv 

but  because  they  followed  not  us,  we  forbade  them." 
They  were  evidently  astonished  that  this  exclusive  spirit 
did  not  meet  with  Jesus'  approval.  Later  still,  when  the 
disciples  were  left  without  the  guidance  of  the  Master's 
presence,  they  followed  the  tradition  of  their  fathers  and 
looked  with  contempt  on  the  Gentiles,  as  "common  and 
unclean."  If  the  account  in  the  Acts  is  a  true  representa- 
tion of  history  and  not,  as  some  have  supposed,  an  attempt 
to  harmonize  the  differences  which  came  near  disrupting 
the  church,  then  it  was  to  Peter  the  church  was  indebted 
for  the  first  attempt  to  rise  to  a  higher  plane  and  recognize 
that  God's  mercy  is  as  wide  as  humanity  itself.  However 
that  may  be,  it  is  evident  that  early  in  the  history  of  the 
church  the  same  crisis  as  that  which  Jonah  had  failed  to 
meet  was  presented  to  the  disciples.  It  was  Paul  who 
finally  won  the  victory — over  Peter,  the  Prince  of  the 
Church.  Even  if  Peter  had  begun  well,  he  was  unable  to 
continue  in  his  well-doing.  Now  the  rock  the  apostolic 
church  came  near  breaking  upon,  no  age  of  the  church  has 
quite  escaped.  In  every  age  there  has  been  a  crisis,  and 
the  church  has  been  called  upon  to  decide  whether  its 
"gourd"  was  more  valuable  than  humanity  itself. 

This  is  the  danger  which  the  churches  of  our  day  are 
called  upon  to  meet.  For  our  church — and  it  makes  no 
difference  by  what  name  we  call  it — ^is  for  each  of  us  the 
"gourd"  which  protects  us  and  is  our  comfort.  He  must 
indeed  be  a  thankless  soul  who  is  not  grateful  for  what  it 
laas  done  for  him.  Its  dogmas  protect  from  the  direct 
rays  of  the  sun  of  truth  which  we  are  unable  to  bear.  Its 
encircling  walls  shield  from  the  hot  wind  of  the  world. 
We  are  grateful  for  it.  We  thank  God  that  we  are  in  it. 
But,  through  its  open  door,  we  look  upon  the  great  world 
and  say  to  ourselves:  "Can  God  be  interested  in  that  great 
world  as  he  is  in  us  ?  Can  there  be  anything  in  this  wicked 
world  that  is  pleasing  to  God?"  Not  unnaturally,  in  our 
indignation  at  wickedness  and  our  joy  of  the  tabernacle, 


xxvi  INTRODUCTION 

we  are  tempted  to  say:  ''No.  All  those  who  are  outside 
the  shelter  of  this  protecting  leaf  are  outside  the  mercy  of 
God.  If  they  would  know  of  the  goodness  of  the  Lord, 
they  must  enter  into  our  habitation.  Till  they  do  that 
God  can  have  nothing  to  do  with  them,  because  they  have 
nothing  to  do  with  him."  That,  I  believe,  is  the  danger 
of  the  whole  church. 

We  look  at  the  heathen  world  and  cannot  deny  that 
there  is  much  in  it  that  is  admirable.  There  are  rules  of 
morality  that  we  should  do  well  to  know  and  obey.  There 
is  a  simplicity  and  gentleness  in  the  relation  of  man  to 
man  which  put  to  shame  our  civilized  struggle  for  exist- 
ence. Then,  nearer  at  home,  we  find  that  some  of  those 
whose. lives  are  the  most  earnest  and  the  sweetest  are  far 
from  the  communion  of  any  of  the  churches.  We  recog- 
nize that  year  by  year  the  boys  and  girls,  trained  in  our 
Sunday-schools,  come  home  from  school  and  college  hav- 
ing lost  all  interest  in  the  church.  It  would  seem  as  if  the 
result  must  be  fatal  to  a  worthy  life,  but,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  many  of  them,  as  teachers  and  doctors  and  social 
workers,  are  an  example  to  us  all.  What  are  we  to  say  to 
these  things?  Have  we  been  mistaken  in  supposing  that 
the  church  has  helped  us?  Is  it  possible  that  it  has  fin- 
ished its  work,  and  that  henceforth  the  great  institution 
which  converted  the  Roman  Empire  and  brought  the  bar- 
barian invaders  of  Europe  to  the  discipleship  of  Christ  is 
about  to  disappear?  And  if  so,  what  is  to  take  its  place? 
While  it  is  well  for  us  to  consider  the  facts,  we  cannot  rest 
content  with  such  a  suggestion. 

What  the  churches  must  learn  to-day  is  that  the  spirit 
of  Jesus  is  not  confined  to  the  organization.  There  are 
multitudes  of  earnest  men  and  women  who  have  lost  all 
interest  in  the  church  but  are  following  Jesus — many  of 
them  ignorant  of  the  fact  that  it  is  he  who  is  their  com- 
panion. ''Did  not  our  hearts  bum  within  us  while  he 
talked  with  us  on  the  way?'*    They  do  not  know  all  that 


INTRODUCTION  xxvii 

they  might  know  of  him,  but  they  are  living  in  his  spirit  of 
sacrifice.  One  is  teaching,  and  another  is  healing,  and  a 
third  is  leaving  father  and  mother  and  devoting  the 
strength  of  life  to  making  the  conditions  of  life  easier  and 
nobler  for  the  poor.  They  ignore  the  churches  and  the 
churches  ignore  them.  Thus  both  are  losing  what  each 
through  co-operation  might  learn. 

The  facts  of  the  spiritual  life  are  before  us.  They  are 
manifest  in  the  lives  of  the  heathen;  they  are  evident  in 
the  conversation  of  those  who  have  no  association  with 
the  churches;  and  above  all,  they  are  to  be  seen  in  the 
lives  of  those  who  are  members  of  every  one  of  the  churches. 
These  are  facts.  But  too  often  the  ecclesiastical  mind  pre- 
fers to  begin  with  a  theory  and  say:  "No  church  which  has 
not  a  'valid'  ministry,  or  which  has  abandoned  the  primi- 
tive form  of  administering  baptism,  or  is  unable  to  point 
to  the  exact  day  and  hour  when  its  members  were  con- 
verted, can  have  the  spirit  of  Christ."  Of  course,  then 
there  can  be  no  end  to  the  controversy. 

Now,  all  Christians  do  believe  that  the  fruits  of  the 
spirit  can  be  found  only  where  Christ  is  present;  all  are 
ready  to  say,  "If  any  man  have  not  the  spirit  of  Christ, 
he  is  none  of  his";  but  too  often  the  corollary  that  "If  any 
man  have  the  spirit  of  Christ  he  is  his"  is  overlooked. 
St.  Paul,  who  was  a  great  expert  in  the  human  soul,  says: 
"The  fruits  of  the  spirit  are  manifest,  which  are  these, 
love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  gentleness,  meekness. 
Against  such  there  is  no  law."  May  we  not  add:  "Against 
such  there  is  no  argument"? 

If  these  be  the  facts — and  they  cannot  be  controverted 
— ^might  it  not  be  well  for  us  to  ask  ourselves,  not  what  is 
the  theory  to  which  we  are  bound,  but  what  are  the  facts 
of  life,  and  what  is  our  duty  in  relation  to  them?  It  used 
to  be  said  by  some  good  men  that  the  people  outside  the 
communion  of  the  church  to  which  they  belonged  were 
outside  the  "covenanted  mercies  of  God."    They  did  not 


xxviii  INTRODUCTION 

ask  themselves  what  those  words  meant;  they  simply  used 
a  formula  which  explains  nothing.  That  time  has  now 
gone  by,  but  we  are  not  clear  as  to  what  we  ought  to  say 
and  do.  It  is  that  confusion  which  is  one  of  the  causes  of 
the  impotence  of  the  churches. 

I  venture  to  suggest  that  what  we  ought  to  say  to  our- 
selves is  that  we  are  thinking  of  our  churches  as  Jonah 
thought  of  his  gourd.  It  has  been  our  refuge  and  protec- 
tion, but  all  along  God  has  been  providing  other  refuges  for 
those  who  are  not  under  the  shadow  of  our  "gourd."  For, 
if  we  do  not  say  that  willingly,  we  may  be  driven  to  it  by 
bitter  experience,  and  though  we  escape  the  anger  which 
poisoned  the  heart  of  the  prophet,  we  shall  continue  to  be 
perplexed  until  we  begin  to  doubt  if  there  be  any  refuge 
for  the  soul  of  man. 

There  is  another  fact  which  has  been  impressed  upon  us 
by  the  experience  of  recent  years,  and  that  is  that  the 
wind  of  the  world  is  blowing  upon  our  "gourd'*  and  the 
worm  of  criticism  is  gnawing  at  its  root.  These  considera- 
tions should  lead  us  to  ask  if  our  experience  may  not  be 
the  same  as  Jonah's?  It  may  be  that  God  will  destroy 
our  refuge  if  we  do  not  use  it  for  the  good  of  mankind  in- 
stead of  as  a  refuge  for  ourselves.  Not  a  few  are  deeply 
concerned;  they  see  that  their  church  is  not  to  their  chil- 
dren what  it  has  been  to  them,  and  they  are  filled  with 
despair  and  believe  the  evil  is  in  their  children  instead  of 
in  themselves.  They  do  not,  indeed,  say  with  the  prophet, 
"I  do  well  to  be  angry  even  unto  death,"  but  failing  to  see 
the  signs  of  the  times,  they  have  no  great  expectation  of 
better  things.    They  cannot  believe  that 

"Our  little  systems  have  their  day, 

They  have  their  day  and  cease  to  be, 


And  thou,  0  God,  art  more  than  they." 

To  admit  that  God  fulfils  himself  in  many  ways  seems 
equivalent  to  saying  that  he  never  has  fulfilled  himself  in 


INTRODUCTION  xxix 

any  way.  It  seems  to  them  that  there  can  be  but  one 
way  of  God's  manifestation  of  the  truth,  even  that  way 
which  is  consonant  with  a  theory  which  they  had  learned 
to  identify  with  revelation  itself.  Some,  like  the  great 
Cardinal  Newman,  or  like  a  recent  learned  and  good 
bishop  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  believing  that  their  own 
"gourd,"  which  had  been  their  comfort  and  protection,  is 
about  to  wither  away,  seek  for  another  "gourd"  whose 
roots,  they  think,  strike  deeper  and  whose  branches  evi- 
dently spread  wider,  and  there,  they  think,  they  shall  be 
at  peace.  It  may  be  so;  but  it  will  be  because  they  are 
able  to  rest  in  something  less  than  the  revelation  of  God's 
goodness  in  their  own  day.  Others,  like  Newman's  brother, 
or  like  Samuel  Butler,  finding  the  church,  as  it  had  been 
represented  to  them,  to  be  no  dwelling-place  for  the  grow- 
ing soul,  turn  from  all  the  churches  with  disgust  and  mock 
at  those  who  do  not  follow  them. 

This  ancient  parable  has  a  word  to  us  to-day.  It  would 
tell  us  that  we  too  are  on  the  eve  of  a  great  revelation — 
the  revelation  of  the  goodness  of  God  throughout  the 
whole  earth,  and  that  the  duty  of  the  church  is  to  bear  wit- 
ness to  that  truth  by  which  alone  the  world  can  be  saved. 

No  doubt  there  are  good  men  and  women  who  will  say: 
"Supposing  this  to  be  true,  what  is  the  conclusion  of  the 
whole  matter?  If  this  exposition  of  the  parable  of  Jonah 
be  true,  then  it  follows  that  there  is  no  real  difference  be- 
tween heathendom  and  Christendom,  between  those  who 
know  Jesus  as  their  Saviour  and  those  who  know  him  not; 
no  difference  between  the  church  which  has  held  to  the 
ancient  order  and  preserved  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints  and  a  sect  which  has  sprung  up  like  a  mushroom 
and  has  no  root  that  will  abide.  All  that  will  be  left  is  an 
invertebrate  religious  sentimentality,  without  law  or  order 
or  definite  teaching — that  is,  without  authority." 

Before  considering  these  objections  in  detail,  would  it 
not  be  well  to  ask  ourselves  whether  the  interpretation  of 


XXX  INTRODUCTION 

the  parable  here  given  is  or  is  not  in  accordance  with  the 
mind  of  Christ?  One  has  only  to  open  the  gospels  to  see. 
When  the  religious  teachers  of  the  day  gathered  about 
Jesus  and  saw  the  mighty  works  which  he  did,  they  could 
not  deny  the  facts.  Therefore  they  advanced  a  theory; 
they  said:  "He  does  these  things  by  the  power  of  Beelze- 
bub." But  Jesus  said:  "To  attribute  any  good  work  to 
any  agency  save  the  spirit  of  God  is  to  be  in  danger  of  the 
sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost."  If  the  facts  would  not  fit 
their  theory,  and  they  did  not,  then  the  theory  must  be 
changed.  Theory  is  man's  interpretation  of  fact.  It  is 
necessarily  fallible,  but  facts  are  the  immutable  acts  of 
God.  If  the  fruits  of  the  spirit  manifested  in  all  the 
churches  are  not  the  result  of  the  presence  of  God,  then 
no  one  of  us  has  valid  ground  for  his  belief  that  he  himself 
is  in  communion  with  God. 

There  are  multitudes  of  Christians  who  do  not  face  the 
facts  of  spiritual  experience,  and  therefore  do  not  feel  the 
force  of  this  inexorable  logic.  They  hold  tenaciously  to 
theories  which  they  have  inherited,  and  while  they  do  not 
go  so  far,  ;at  least  in  the  Protestant  churches,  as  to  deny 
that  God's  mercy  is  being  manifested  in  other  churches  than 
their  own,  they  are  suspicious,  unsympathetic,  and  some- 
times even  contemptuous  of  those  who  do  not  follow  them. 
Is  not  this  a  modem  form  of  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost? 
If  the  facts  were  faced,  might  not  the  spiritual  unity  which 
all  good  men  declare  they  desire  be  found  by  following  a 
new  path?  It  is  to  indicate  the  new  way  of  Christian 
unity  that  this  book  has  been  written. 


CHAPTER  I'     '•  '"     *  '  " 
THE  CRISIS  OF  CIVILIZATION 

The  crisis  of  the  world  may  be  thought  of  as  political, 
economic,  or  social.  But,  however  we  look  at  it,  it  is  so 
dreadful  that  not  a  few  serious-minded  men  are  asking 
themselves  if  Western  civilization  is  about  to  fail.  To 
some  this  may  seem  a  futile,  foolish,  perhaps  morbid  ques- 
tion. But  when  we  recall  what  history  has  taught  us — 
that  civilizations  great  and  wonderful  have  passed  away 
and  left  almost  no  record — why  should  we  conclude  that 
the  present  civilization  which  we  think  so  glorious  should 
be  immortal?  The  story  of  the  decline  and  fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire  is  one  of  the  classics  of  English  literature, 
and  is  no  doubt  familiar  to  all.  It  may  not,  however,  be 
out  of  place  to  recall  certain  of  the  salient  facts  which 
ought  to  impress  the  student  of  the  present  history  of  the 
world.  These  are  the  causes  which,  it  is  generally  ad- 
mitted, led  to  the  decay  of  the  splendor  of  Rome:  first,  in- 
creasing luxury,  which  sapped  the  Stoic  virtues.  Second, 
the  prevalence  of  divorce,  which  undermined  the  family. 
Every  student  of  Plutarch  knows  that  the  family  was  the 
noblest  product  of  Roman  civilization.  Indeed,  we  may 
say  that  it  was  like  the  Trojan  Palladium;  when  it  fell,  the 
fall  of  the  city  was  inevitable.  Third,  taxation,  so  heavy 
that  industry  was  throttled  and  men,  in  despair,  declared 
that  it  was  not  worth  while  to  save.  Fourth,  the  civil 
wars,  which  cut  down  the  flower  of  Roman  manhood. 
Fifth,  the  dilution  of  citizenship  by  the  inclusion  of  slaves 
and  barbarians,  who  felt  no  thrill  of  glory  when  the  story 
of  the  Eternal  City  was  sung. 

These  are  the  facts  which  impressed  the  mind  of  Gibbon, 
but  there  were  deeper  reasons  tiian  this  observant  historian 


2  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

■  p<*^j?ceived.  Frbvide  has  sunk  the  probe  of  criticism  deeper 
«  ,  into  the  wounds  of  the  empire.  "It  was  an  age  of  mate- 
""'^  rial  progress  sPii  material  civilization;  an  age  of  civil  lib- 
erty and  intellectual  culture;  an  age  of  pamphlets  and  epi- 
grams, of  salons  and  of  dinner-parties,  of  senatorial  majori- 
ties and  electoral  corruption.  The  highest  ofi&ces  of  the 
state  were  open  in  theory  to  the  meanest  citizen;  they  were 
confined,  in  fact,  to  those  who  had  the  longest  purses,  or 
the  most  ready  use  of  the  tongue  on  popular  platforms. 
.  .  .  The  struggles  between  plebeians  and  patricians  for 
equality  of  privilege  were  over,  and  a  new  division  had 
been  formed  between  the  party  of  property  and  a  party 
who  desired  a  change  in  the  structure  of  society.  .  .  . 
The  rich  were  extravagant,  for  life  had  ceased  to  have 
practical  interest,  except  for  its  material  pleasures;  the 
occupation  of  the  higher  classes  was  to  obtain  money  with- 
out labor,  and  to  spend  it  in  idle  enjoyment.  Patriotism 
survived  on  the  lips,  but  patriotism  meant  the  ascendency 
of  the  party  which  would  maintain  the  existing  order  of 
things,  or  would  overthrow  it  for  a  more  equal  distribu- 
tion of  the  good  things  which  alone  were  valued.  Reli- 
gion, once  the  foundation  of  the  laws  and  rules  of  per- 
sonal conduct,  had  subsided  into  opinion.  The  educated, 
in  their  hearts,  disbelieved  it.  Temples  were  still  built 
with  increasing  splendor;  the  established  forms  were  scru- 
pulously observed.  Public  men  spoke  conventionally  of 
Providence,  that  they  might  throw  on  their  opponents  the 
odiimi  of  impiety;  but  of  genuine  belief  that  life  had  any 
serious  meaning,  there  was  none  remaining  beyond  the 
circle  of  the  silent,  patient,  ignorant  multitude.  .  .  .  The 
Romans  ceased  to  believe,  and  in  losing  their  faith  they 
became  as  steel  becomes  when  it  is  demagnetized:  the 
spiritual  quality  was  gone  out  of  them,  and  the  high  society 
of  Rome  itself  became  a  society  of  powerful  animals  with 
an  enormous  appetite  for  pleasure.  Wealth  poured  in 
more  and  more,  and  luxury  grew  more  unbounded.    Pal- 


THE  CRISIS  OF  CIVILIZATION  3 

aces  sprang  up  in  the  city,  castles  in  the  country,  villas  at 
pleasant  places  by  the  sea,  and  parks,  and  fish-pounds, 
and  game  preserves,  and  gardens,  and  vast  retinues  of 
servants.  When  natural  pleasures  had  been  indulged  in 
to  satiety,  pleasures  which  were  against  nature  were  im- 
ported from  the  East  to  stimulate  the  exhausted  appetite. 
To  make  money — money  by  any  means,  lawful  or  unlaw- 
ful— became  the  universal  passion."  * 

Are  the  like  signs — vulgarizing  luxury,  divorce  leading 
to  the  dissolution  of  the  family,  taxation  blocking  the 
wheels  of  industry,  destruction  of  yoimg,  vigorous,  prom- 
ising life  by  the  slaughter  of  war,  a  lowering  of  the  stand- 
ard of  citizenship  by  the  inclusion  of  the  ignorant,  the  im- 
becile, and  the  vicious  in  the  electorate,  the  rule  of  the 
"boss"  in  our  state  and  municipal  politics,  the  love  of 
money,  and  the  loss  of  faith — characteristic  of  our  day 
and  land?  If  they  be,  what  shall  we  say  of  them? 
Whether  we  say,  as  some  do,  that  they  are  merely  super- 
ficial, or  believe,  as  many  thoughtful  men  and  women  do 
believe,  that  they  are  symptoms  of  a  deep-seated  disease, 
he,  I  think,  must  be  a  heedless  man  who  does  not  admit 
that  there  is  at  least  danger  that  our  civilization  may 
perish  as  other  civilizations  have  perished,  although  to  the 
men  of  old  such  a  thing  seemed  as  impossible  as  it  does 
to  the  careless  to-day.  "They  were  eating  and  drinking, 
marrying  and  giving  in  marriage,  and  the  flood  came." 

*See  "Caesar,  a  Sketch,"  James  Anthony  Froude,  pp.  6-7,  18-19. 
Ferrero,  in  "The  Ruin  of  Ancient  Civilization  and  the  Triumph  of 
Christianity,"  says  that  while  the  facts  above  named  are  to  be  counted 
causes  of  the  fall  of  Rome,  the  fundamental  cause  was  a  spiritual  one 
— the  loss  of  authority — and  believes  that  the  present  crisis  of  the 
world  is  due  to  the  same  cause. 

Undoubtedly  there  is  truth  in  this,  but  all  that  it  seems  to  prove  is 
that  the  various  external  authorities  in  which  the  world  has  tried  to 
rest  have  been  found  inadequate.  The  peace  of  the  world  cannot  be 
gained  through  the  re-establishment  of  any  of  those  discredited  authori- 
ties; a  more  august  authority  must  be  found,  the  authority  of  the  spirit 
speaking  through  the  universal  conscience  of  Christian  men.  See  "The 
Seat  of  Authority  in  Religion,"  James  Martineau,  pp.  67-68. 


4  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

There  are  not  a  few  thoughtful  men  who  will  say:  "While 
of  course  there  is  danger,  there  is  no  cause  for  panic.  The 
times  at  present  are  out  of  joint,  but  there  will  be  time  for 
the  restoration  of  the  world  as  it  was  ten  years  ago,  and 
then  it  will  be  found  that  things  will  go  on  much  as  they 
did  before.  We  do  not  deny  that  many  present  facts  are 
disquieting,  but  the  dark  picture  drawn  by  those  who  re- 
call the  fate  of  Rome  is  not  justified.  There  are  founda- 
tions of  modem  civilization  which  have  been  laid  since  the 
fall  of  Rome,  and  on  these  our  civilization  firmly  rests." 

When  we  inquire  what  these  foundations  are,  we  are 
told  that  first  of  all  there  is  "capital."  "The  fluidity  of 
capital  is  a  comparatively  modem  discovery.  The  great 
wealth  accumulated  after  a  century  of  intensive  industrial- 
ism, and  the  fluidity  of  capital,  which  flows  from  one  part 
of  the  world  to  another  by  a  law  as  sure  as  that  which 
regulates  the  winds,  something  which  Rome  never  knew, 
is  a  sure  foundation  on  which  Westem  civilization  is  built. 
It  cannot  fall  while  that  rock  remains."  This  may  be 
tme,  but  when  we  hear,  not  alarmists,  but  serious-minded 
men  in  England  to-day  asking  if  it  be  not  possible  that 
England  shall  be  bankmpt,  it  should  give  us  pause.  If  it 
should  come  to  pass  that  England,  for  mere  self-preserva- 
tion, should  be  obliged  to  repudiate  her  great  debt— and 
that,  as  I  say,  is  seriously  feared  by  some  to-day — who 
does  not  know  that  France  must  follow,  and  Italy  follow 
France?  In  such  case,  the  fluidity  of  capital,  which  we 
thought  was  our  safeguard,  may  prove  to  be  a  liability 
rather  than  an  asset.  It  has  been  a  witness  to  the  inter- 
locking of  all  national  interests;  but  if  one  were  to  fail, 
they  woidd  all  go  down  like  a  row  of  card  houses.  Then 
what  becomes  of  our  capital?  Wealth  is  not  bullion;  it  is 
credit.  If  credit  be  shaken,  then  the  foundation  will  be 
shaken.  Europe  will  fail.  "But,"  it  may  be  said,  "Amer- 
ica would  remain."  For  how  long?  With  our  best  cus- 
tomers ruined,  with  repudiation  of  the  great  debts  owed  to 


THE  CRISIS  OF  CIVILIZATION  5 

this  country,  and  with  the  same  poison  working  in  this 
country  which  destroyed  Europe,  how  long  could  America 
stand  alone  as  the  guardian  of  Western  civilization? 

It  may  be  said:  "This  is  but  a  part  of  the  story.  All 
that  has  been  suggested  might  happen,  and  still  we  should 
not  be  ruined  even  if  we  were  temporarily  embarrassed. 
There  are  immense  riches  in  this  land  which  have  not  yet 
been  brought  to  the  surface  and  placed  in  the  hands  of 
man.''  I  do  not  know  how  great  those  riches  are,  nor 
does  any  one.  It  is  quite  possible  that  we  have  over- 
estimated the  amount  of  coal  and  iron  and  oil  upon  which 
the  industrial  life  of  the  nation  is  dependent.  But  how- 
ever that  may  be,  it  must  be  remembered  that  we  have 
been  thinking  of  latent,  not  actual,  wealth,  and  that  latent, 
to  become  actual,  wealth  requires  unflagging  industry. 
But  Russia  has  shown  us  the  possibility  of  a  great  people 
either  refusing  or  being  unable  to  work,  and  in  conse- 
quence sinking  into  appalling  poverty  in  a  few  years. 
Now  if  England,  France,  and  Italy  were  bankrupt,  and 
Russia  were  unable  or  refused  to  work,  and  Germany  de- 
cided that  it  was  unprofitable  to  work  for  the  benefit  of 
her  conquerors,  where  would  be  our  wealth,  which  we  sup- 
posed would  support  us  until  the  world  could  be  restored 
to  its  ancient  glory?  Again  we  may  turn  eyes  of  hope  to 
America.  But  if  the  working  men — ^mechanics  and  farm- 
ers— are  convinced  that  they  are  not  receiving  a  fair  share 
of  the  result  of  combined  capital  and  labor — and  that  they 
are  so  convinced  there  can  be  little  doubt — we  may  antici- 
pate an  industrial  revolution  in  this  land  which  will  at 
least  temporarily  paralyze  our  industrial  activities  and  still 
further  reduce  our  accumulated  wealth. 

But  the  optimist  will  not  easily  let  us  go.  Such  an 
experienced  statesman  and  interesting  philosopher  as  Mr. 
Arthur  Balfour  has  lately  called  attention  to  the  fact  that 
in  all  these  discussions  of  the  fate  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
"science"  has  been  overlooked.    It  is  this,  he  says,  that 


6  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

differentiates  our  days  from  those  which  preceded  the  in- 
cursion of  the  barbarians.  It  might  seem  impertinent  to 
differ  from  such  a  distinguished  man,  but  I  think  even  the 
most  modest  of  us  would  be  justified  in  saying  that  this 
sounds  more  like  the  optimism  of  the  nineteenth  century 
when  it  was  expected  that  science  was  about  to  bring  in 
the  millenniima  without  effort  on  the  part  of  man,  than  the 
realism  of  the  twentieth  century  with  which  we  are  now 
called  upon  to  deal.  For  great  as  have  been  the  blessings 
of  science — ^in  the  hand  of  the  physician  it  has  soothed 
pain,  it  has  made  the  crooked  straight,  it  has  prolonged  the 
span  of  human  life,  it  has  enlarged  our  mental  horizon  and 
shown  the  "rock  from  which  man  was  hewn  and  the  pit 
from  which  he  was  digged" — what  has  it  been  in  the  hands 
of  the  "men  who  delight  in  war"?  What  in  the  hands 
of  those — the  social  maniacs — whom  we  call  anarchists? 
What  salvation  did  it  bring  to  Germany,  "princess  among 
the  nations  "  ?  Is  science  a  blessing  ?  It  depends  upon  the 
character  of  the  men  who  handle  it.  But  it  can  be  con- 
fined to  no  class  or  no  character.  Indirectly  it  may  do  a 
work  which  was  not  to  have  been  expected.  The  romance 
of  war  arose  in  the  days  when  war  consisted  in  the  meeting 
face  to  face  of  two  enemies,  and  courage,  strength,  and 
skill  determined  the  issue.  But  every  historian  of  the 
Middle  Ages  has  called  attention  to  the  great  revolution 
brought  about  by  the  invention  of  gunpowder,  which  placed 
the  peasant  on  a  level  with  the  mailed  warrior.  Wliat  is 
that  compared  with  the  revolution  which  this  generation 
has  seen?  Where  is  the  romance  of  being  blown  to  pieces 
by  a  shell  cast  into  the  air  by  an  adversary  miles  from  the 
seat  of  battle?  I  talked  not  long  ago  with  a  man  in  a 
convalescent  home — a  Canadian  soldier.  I  asked  him  how 
long  he  had  been  in  the  trenches  before  he  was  wounded. 
He  replied:  "I  was  not  there  over  three  minutes.  I  had 
trained  in  camp  for  a  year  and  then  was  sent  to  the 
trenches.    I  asked  a  man  where  I  was  to  stand  and  then 


THE  CRISIS  OF  CIVILIZATION  7 

it  was  all  over.  The  next  thing  I  knew  I  was  in  a  hospital, 
and  a  doctor  from  Chicago  had  cut  a  piece  out  of  my 
skull."  I  asked  him  if  he  had  recovered.  "I  am  well 
enough,"  he  said,  "but  sometimes  I  fall  unconscious." 
Poor  wretch !  He  did  not  know  that  epilepsy  was  before 
him  and  that  his  mind  would  soon  be  gone.  He  was  "only 
there  three  minutes"!  Where  is  the  romance  in  such 
slaughter  as  that?  But  it  may  be  he  will  not  die  in  vain. 
It  may  be  that  his  fate  and  that  of  thousands  like  him  will 
help  to  rid  us  from  the  delusion  that  war  is  a  glorious 
thing,  instead  of  being,  as  it  really  is,  the  denial  of  human- 
ity. But  that  which  calls  for  our  immediate  attention  is 
that  in  a  new  war  the  destructive  means  will  be  less  me- 
chanical than  chemical,  and  that  the  object  will  be  not  so 
much  the  defeat  of  an  enemy  in  the  field  as  the  destruction 
of  the  peoples — ^helpless  old  men,  tender  women,  and  inno- 
cent children.  Now  if  that  hell  is  to  be  let  loose  upon  the 
earth,  why  should  we  suppose  that  our  civilization  can 
endure?* 

But  the  internal  sjonptoms  of  decay  are  not  the  only 
signs  of  the  times  which  we  are  called  upon  to  consider. 
Rome  was  not  built  in  a  day  and  Rome  did  not  fall  in  a 
day.  Long  before  the  flood  came  it  was  recognized  by 
thoughtful  men  that  while  the  walls  had  been  well  built 
and  were  still  strong,  nevertheless  there  were  serious  cracks 
in  the  masonry;  the  foundations  were  showing  signs  of 
weakness  and  the  walls  bulging  out.  There  were  spas- 
modic efforts  made  from  time  to  time  to  repair  the  breaches, 
but  they  were  met  with  scepticism  or  indifference.  Even 
so,  they  would  probably  have  lasted  for  centuries  longer 
than  they  did  had  there  been  no  external  pressure  upon 
them.  That  external  pressure  came  in  what  we  call  the 
incursions  of  the  barbarians.    When  that  great  mass  was 

*See  the  lecture  by  General  Bliss  on  "Disarmament"  in  "What 
Really  Happened  at  Paris.  The  Story  of  the  Peace  Conference."  By 
American  Delegates.    Edited  by  Edward  Mandell  House. 


8  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

hurled  upon  them,  the  walls  of  the  Eternal  City  fell  with 
a  crash,  the  echo  of  which  is  heard  round  the  world  to-day. 

But,  it  may  be  asked,  "Why  recall  the  well-known 
story?  Is  it  suggested  that  there  is  an  analogy  between 
the  fifth  and  twentieth  centuries?  Is  there  fear  of  a  new 
barbarian  incursion?"  If  we  say  "Yes,"  no  doubt  it  will 
seem  to  not  a  few  to  be  too  fantastic  to  deserve  the  atten- 
tion of  sane  men.  Yet,  why  should  it  seem  fantastic? 
Why  should  it  seem  incredible?  Probably  because  we  do 
not  recognize  that  there  is  to-day  any  enemy  of  Western 
civilization.    Yet  that  is  what  Asia  is. 

For  a  thousand  years  the  wars  of  Europe  and  America 
have  been  civil  wars — that  is,  conflicts  between  men  shar- 
ing a  more  or  less  common  ideal  and  derived  from  a  com- 
mon stock.  But  we  forget  that  for  almost  a  millennium 
previous  the  wars  had  been  between  Asia  and  Europe. 
Have  we  forgotten  how,  under  the  leadership  first  of  Per- 
sia, then  of  Arabia,  and  then  led  by  the  Saracens,  and 
lastly  by  the  fierce  Osmanli,  Asia  came  so  near  to  con- 
quering Europe  and  preventing  the  building  of  this  civiliza- 
tion which  we  think  so  enduring  that  we  cannot  to-day 
read  the  story  of  the  battle  of  the  Loire  or  of  the  siege  of 
Vienna  without  a  quickening  of  the  pulse  and  a  thrill  of 
atavistic  fear?  Europe  conquered.  Its  faith,  its  indus- 
try, and  its  science  enabled  it  to  overcome  Asia,  so  that 
for  centuries  Asia  has  been  a  negligible  factor  in  the  world's 
history.  Why,  then,  should  it  be  supposed  that  it  can 
now  become  a  menace?  Our  Saviour,  speaking  to  the 
men  of  his  day  and  foretelling  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  did 
not  rest  his  prediction  upon  the  evidences  of  internal  decay 
alone;  he  pointed  to  the  dark  cloud  of  Rome,  and  an- 
nounced a  great  law  of  history:  "Wherever  the  carcass  is, 
there  will  the  vultures  be  gathered  together."  If  the  life, 
the  spirit,  the  faith  die  out  of  Western  civilization,  it  will 
become  a  carcass,  and,  by  a  law  of  history,  the  vultures 
will  gather  together. 

I  would  not  add  one  grain  to  the  suspicion  already  too 


THE  CRISIS  OF  CIVILIZATION  9 

great  in  certain  parts  of  this  country,  of  the  Oriental  peo- 
ples; but  we  Christians  have  no  right  to  ask  that  they 
should  not  take  advantage  of  the  opportunity  that  may 
come  to  them  to  avenge  an  ancient  grudge.  For  what  has 
Europe,  in  its  diplomatic  and  economic  activities,  backed 
up  by  army  and  navy,  done  during  all  the  time  that  it  has 
had  Asia  beneath  its  feet?  The  shameful  story  can  be 
read,  from  the  "Opium  War"  to  the  suppression  of  the 
Boxer  rebellion.  And  that  history  has  made  a  profound 
impression.  Asia  has  learned  that  the  greatness  of  the 
leading  nations  of  Europe  and  America  has  been  built 
upon  the  foimdation  of  the  oppression  of  weaker  people. 
If,  then,  the  opportunity  comes,  and  we  in  turn  are  weak, 
by  what  right  shall  we  ask  them  to  refrain  from  doing 
what  we  have  done?  Should  we  not  receive  the  answer 
that  Shylock  gave  when  begged  not  to  take  advantage  of 
the  disasters  of  his  debtor? 

"If  you  wrong  us,  shall  we  not  revenge?  If  we  are  like 
you  in  the  rest,  we  will  resemble  you  in  that.  If  a  Jew 
wrong  a  Christian,  what  is  his  humility?  Revenge.  If  a 
Christian  wrong  a  Jew,  what  should  his  sufferance  be  by 
Christian  example?  Why,  revenge.  The  villainy  you 
teach  me  I  will  execute,  and  it  shall  go  hard  but  I  will  bet- 
ter the  instruction." 

What  wrongs  have  not  India,  China,  Japan  to  revenge? 
"Even  so,"  it  may  be  said,  "they  have  not  the  power." 
Why  have  they  not  the  power?  We  may  soon  no  longer 
have  the  wealth  on  which  we  depended.  They  have  the 
men;  they  have  all  that  science  has  armed  us  with.  I 
think,  if  we  have  read  history  aright,  we  shall  be  obliged 
to  say:  "All  they  need  is  a  leader.  Let  a  great  leader 
arise — either  an  individual  or  a  nation — as  was  the  case  of 
old,  and  there  will  be  no  reason  why  Asia  should  not  arise 
in  her  might  and  destroy  that  in  which  we  trust.*    If 

*"In  this  new  era  we  have  the  assertion  of  the  full  independence 
of  the  Indian  mind.  The  educated  Indian  now  regards  himself  as 
full-grown  man,  the  equal  in  every  respect  of  the  cultivated  European, 


lo  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

Europe  and  America  are  dismembered  or  weakened,  then 
the  law  of  the  carcass  and  the  vultures  will  reign/* 

Nor  if  we  turn  from  the  general  to  the  particular,  does 
the  outlook  become  more  encouraging.  Who  can  con- 
sider the  potential  power  of  Russia  and  fail  to  be  im- 
pressed by  the  awful  danger  that  lurks  in  that  desperate 
people?  There  are  not  a  few  thoughtful  men  who  believe 
that  the  reign  of  terror  in  Russia  will  be  followed  by  the 
rise  of  an  imperialistic  leader,  as  was  the  case  in  France, 
and  that  inflamed  by  the  faith  in  the  rights  of  the  prole- 
tariat, as  France  was  by  the  faith  in  the  "rights  of  man," 
they  will  sweep  over  Europe.  But,  as  *' history  does  not 
repeat  itself,"  it  may  be  that  the  leader  will  be  found,  not 
in  an  individual  but  in  a  nation.  Such  a  nation  may  well 
be  Japan.  There  is  before  her  the  example  of  England,  a 
little  island,  ruling  a  great  colonial  empire.  There  is  the 
example  of  Germany — and  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that 
the  influence  of  German  imperialism  has  been  great  in 
Japan.  It  might,  indeed,  seem  at  first  as  if  the  fate  of 
Germany  might  prove  a  warning.  But  no  one  knows  bet- 
ter than  Japan  how  near  Germany  came  to  winning  the 
late  war.  The  statesmen  of  Japan  may  well  say  to  them- 
selves that  the  luck  is  not  likely  to  run  again  so  disas- 
trously against  a  player  who  places  his  stake  on  the  num- 
ber which  has  just  lost.  If  China  can  be  dominated,  Rus- 
sia led,  India  and  Persia  incited  to  revolt,  and  the  great 
Mohammedan  peoples  consolidated,  as  the  Turks  were 

not  to  be  set  aside  as  an  Asiatic,  or  as  a  member  of  a  dark  race.  He 
claims  the  right  of  thinking  his  own  thoughts;  and  he  is  quite  prepared 
to  burn  what  he  has  hitherto  adored  and  to  create  a  new  heaven  and 
a  new  earth.  This  adult  self-confidence  was  immeasurably  strength- 
ened by  the  victory  of  Japan  over  Russia.  Every  Asiatic  felt  himself 
recreated  by  that  great  event.  To  all  Asiatic  lands  it  was  a  crisis  in 
race-history,  the  moment  when  the  age-old  flood  of  European  aggres- 
sion was  turned  back.  The  exultation  which  every  Indian  felt  over 
the  victory  lifted  the  national  spirit  to  its  height  and  gave  a  new  note 
of  strength  to  the  period." — "Modern  Religious  Movements  in  India," 
by  J.  N.  Farquhar,  pp.  354-355- 


THE  CRISIS  OF  CIVILIZATION  ii 

never  able  to  consolidate  them,  might  not  the  East  liberate 
itself  and  conquer  the  world  ? 

But  if  this  suggestion  seem  too  fantastic — though  it  is 
no  more  fantastic  than  what  this  generation  has  seen — can 
we  say  that  a  conflict  between  the  United  States  and  Japan 
is  impossible?  Should  that  come,  there  is  one  thing  that, 
I  think,  may  be  confidently  prophesied,  and  that  is,  that 
in  all  the  churches  there  will  be  heard  voices  declaring 
that  this  is  a  new  crusade.  We  shall  be  told  that  the  war 
came  because  Japan  closed  the  "open  door"  to  China;  or 
that  the  people  of  the  Pacific  coast  would  not  consent  to 
have  their  pure  "Nordic"  blood  contaminated  by  an 
Asiatic  strain.  In  this  there  will  be  some  truth.  But  if 
before  the  conflict  comes,  and  we  still  have  time  to  con- 
sider the  question  dispassionately,  we  should  tell  the  fun- 
damental truth,  which  is  that  such  a  war  would  be  the 
inevitable  result  of  the  conflict  between  the  imperialistic 
designs  of  Japan  and  the  imperialistic  designs  of  the 
United  States  in  the  Pacific,  it  might  be  that  an  adjust- 
ment might  be  made.  The  churches  should  be  preparing 
to  speak  with  authority  before  the  storm  breaks.  For  the 
churches  are  responsible  in  no  small  degree  for  the  present 
tension.  Few  voices  were  raised  in  the  churches  against 
the  imperialistic  experiment  of  the  United  States  which 
followed  the  Spanish  War.  No  one  of  the  churches  failed 
more  lamentably  than  the  Episcopal  Church,  which,  influ- 
enced by  the  example  of  England,  hailed,  by  the  mouth  of 
some  of  its  most  influential  bishops,  "  the  glorious  mission 
of  America  to  bear  its  share  of  the  *  white  man's  burden.'" 
Such  men,  if  war  comes  again,  will  be  as  truly,  even  though 
imintentionally,  responsible  as  were  the  leaders  of  the 
Lutheran  Church  in  Germany  who  failed  to  protest  against 
Bismarck's  policy  of  "blood  and  iron"  for  the  real  out- 
break of  the  World  War. 

I  have  spoken  of  those  who  make  light  of  the  signs  of 
the  times  as  "optimists,"  for  such  they  like  to  call  them- 


12  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

selves;  but  he  only  is  a  true  optimist  who  faces  the  facts  of 
life,  estimates  at  their  true  value  the  dangers  of  the  pres- 
ent, and  yet  has  faith  enough  to  believe  that  out  of  evil 
God  will  bring  good.  It  is  the  latter  only  who  can  prop- 
erly be  called  an  optimist,  though  to  the  thoughtless  he 
will  seem  to  be  a  Cassandra  or  a  Jeremiah.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  will  be  found  those  who  say  that  the  outlook 
is  so  discouraging  as  to  be  hopeless.  But  it  has  been  well 
said,  "Truth  is  never  discouraging."  The  difficulties  are 
indeed  great,  but  so  should  be  our  faith.  "When  the  Son 
of  Man  Cometh  will  he  find  faith  on  the  earth?''  That 
should  be  for  us,  as  it  was  for  Jesus,  the  one  important 
question.  Underneath  the  irreconcilable  ideals  of  East 
and  West  is  a  spiritual  one.  The  fatalism  of  the  East 
counts  the  life  of  the  individual  as  the  small  dust  in  the 
balance.  What  spiritual  power  have  we  with  which  to 
meet  the  fatalism  of  the  East?  That  is  the  fundamental 
question  and  leads  to  a  consideration  of  the  mission  and 
the  task  of  the  churches. 

It  is  true  we  have  great  hopes;  nevertheless,  the  dangers 
have  not  passed.  So  while  we  should  rejoice,  and  do  re- 
joice, at  the  dawn  of  a  better  day,  we  must  listen  to  St. 
PauFs  stirring  words:  "The  day  is  at  hand,  therefore  put 
off  the  works  of  darkness  and  put  on  the  armor  of  light." 
The  dangers  of  which  we  have  been  thinking  may  not  be 
so  imminent  as  has  been  assumed,  but  they  have  not  dis- 
appeared. "Eternal  vigilance  is  the  price  of  liberty." 
How  much  more  must  it  be  said  to  be  the  price  of  salva- 
tion, whether  personal  or  universal ! 


CHAPTER  II 
THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

Have  the  churches  remembered  their  primary  mission? 
The  church  was  ordained  to  be  a  missionary  society. 
Every  one  of  the  churches  has  such  a  society.  But  can  it 
be  denied  that  it  is  rather  as  an  adjunct  than  as  a  manifes- 
tation of  the  essential  work  of  the  churches?  How  many 
we  know  in  all  the  churches  who  state  plainly  that  they 
have  no  interest  in  foreign  missions.  This  may  mean  no 
more,  and  I  believe  does  mean  no  more,  than  that  people 
are  indifferent  to  many  of  the  missionary  activities  of  the 
churches.  But  can  it  be  denied  that  in  all  the  churches 
the  great  work  of  the  conversion  of  the  world  has  been 
preached  rather  as  a  work  of  supererogation  than  as  the 
primary  work  of  the  church  of  Christ?  Until  the  spirit  of 
missions  is  revived,  there  can  be  no  expectation  that  the 
churches  can  meet  the  crisis  of  the  world. 

Again  let  us  turn  to  the  history  of  Rome.  As  a  result  of 
the  barbarian  invasion,  the  ancient  civilization  fell.  How 
much  of  it  was  lost  we  shall  probably  never  know.  That 
everything  was  not  lost  was  due  to  the  Christian  church. 
But  why  the  church  was  spared  when  so  much  else  was  lost 
has  not,  I  think,  been  sufficiently  considered.  Why  was  it 
that  those  fierce  men  who  knew  nothing  of  the  "glory 
that  was  Greece"  nor  "the  grandeur  that  was  Rome" 
spared  the  church?  Every  one  knows  the  familiar  story 
of  the  great  pope,  Leo  I,  going  out  to  meet  the  conqueror, 
and  that  the  barbarian  yielded  to  the  bishop.  Doubtless, 
as  Gibbon  says,  "the  pressing  eloquence  of  Leo,  his  majes- 
tic aspect,  and  sacerdotal  robes  excited  the  veneration  of 
Attila  for  the  spiritual  father  of  the  Christians."  But 
these  would  have  effected  but  a  momentary  check  had 

13 


14  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

they  not  been  supplemented  by  the  fear  and  veneration  of 
the  army  which  he  led.  Attila  was  a  Hun,  but  the  Ostro- 
Goths  and  many  others  in  the  barbarian  herd  were  nomi- 
nally Christian,  and  it  is  to  them  that  the  salvation  of  the 
church  in  that  critical  hour  is  due.  Had  it  been  a  heathen 
flood  that  poured  over  Europe  the  church  would  have 
perished  as  did  so  much  else.  But  centuries  before,  while 
the  legions  were  still  holding  the  banks  of  the  Rhine  and  of 
the  Danube,  while  the  camps  of  Rome  were  still  upon  the 
Hellespont,  "holding  the  fort,"  Christian  men  climbed  the 
mountains  of  the  Balkans,  crossed  the  plains  of  Hungary, 
penetrated  the  forests  of  Bohemia,  and  journeyed  as  far 
as  the  shores  of  the  Baltic,  preaching  Jesus  Christ  * 
Therefore,  when  the  dam  broke  and  the  waters  of  the 
Rhine  and  the  Danube  and  the  Black  Sea  poured  in  over 
Asia  Minor,  Illyricum,  Italy,  Spain,  and  France,  the  church 
and  the  church  alone  rode  like  the  ark  on  the  waves  of  this 
troublesome  world.  The  barbarians  saw  in  the  lives  of 
the  saintly  women  and  heroic  men  the  culmination  of  a 
faith  of  which  they  had  already  heard  and  which  they  in  a 
measure  had  learned  to  obey.  They  saw  in  the  faces  of 
little  children  a  light  that  had  begun  to  dawn  in  the  dark 
forests  of  their  former  homes,  and  they  knelt  to  kiss  the 
feet  of  the  Infant  Jesus  and  bowed  down  before  the  cross. 
They  were  not  awed  by  any  bishop;  they  were  not  "con- 
verted" by  any  organization;  they  recognized  their  spiri- 
tual kin  in  the  Christians  of  Europe  and  spared  them. 
They  had  been  converted  not  by  the  CathoHc  Church; 
they  had  heard  the  gospel  from  those  whom  that  church 
had  cast  out.f 
The  lesson  should  not  be  hard  to  learn.    If  before  the 


*  Some  of  the  early  missionaries  were  captives.  Their  conquerors 
little  guessed  that  in  scattering  them  through  Central  Europe  they 
were  preparing  for  their  own  submission  to  the  captives*  Lord.  "Cap- 
tivity was  again  carried  captive." 

t  The  Arians. 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES         15 

new  barbaric  invasion  of  Western  civilization  breaks 
through  the  barriers  that  army  and  navy  protect,  the 
churches  were  to  send  out  their  messengers  into  all  lands, 
the  same  miracle  might  be  worked  again  in  our  day,  and 
the  faith  of  Christ  might  be  saved. 

The  crisis  of  the  world  should  lead  to  a  revolution  in 
foreign  missions.  If  Christian  men  were  seriously  to  ask 
themselves  what  is  their  duty  in  the  presence  of  the  possi- 
bility of  a  new  barbaric  invasion,  they  might  be  led  to  feel 
that  it  is  the  missionaries  rather  than  armies  and  navies 
upon  which  our  hope  depends.  I  believe  that  the  Danish 
Mission  at  Serampore,  and  the  Zenana  Mission  of  Ameri- 
can women  in  India;  the  Yale  Mission,  and  St.  John's 
College,  and  St.  Agnes  School  in  China;  St.  PauFs  College 
and  Hospital  in  Japan  and  Robert  College  in  Constanti- 
nople— to  mention  but  a  few  of  those  agencies  which  in 
modem  ways  are  doing  the  same  work  which  the  men  of 
old  did,  and  so  saved  the  church  when  the  Roman  Empire 
fell — ^are  doing  more  for  the  safety  of  Western  civilization 
than  all  the  armies  and  navies  of  the  world  combined.* 
For,  while  the  West  has  shown  its  power  to  triumph  over 
the  weak,  which  will  lead  to  revenge,  the  messengers  of 
peace — certainly  some  of  them — have  had  the  courage  to 
say  that  we  are  ashamed  of  the  misuse  of  our  power  and 
have  sent  them  to  reveal  what  it  is  that  we  really  value. 

The  first  thing  that  we  value  is  the  beautiful  life  of  Jesus; 
but  his  death  is  more  beautiful  still.    The  heathen  may 

*  That  the  English  government  of  India  since  the  repeal  of  the  char- 
ter of  the  East  India  Company  has  been  a  blessing  to  India  will  be 
denied  only  by  those  who  are  so  obsessed  by  the  theory  of  "self-deter- 
mination" that  they  have  not  paused  to  consider  what  "self"  implies. 
The  modern  religious  movement  among  the  natives  of  India  would 
have  been  impossible  without  the  strong  arm  of  the  government  which 
protected  religious  freedom,  and  the  rise  of  Nationalism  would  have 
been  impossible  without  the  previous  training  of  the  natives  by  English 
officials.  But  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  one  of  the  greatest  bless- 
ings was  the  freedom  granted  the  missionaries  to  preach  the  gospel, 
which  the  East  India  Company  had  not  permitted. 


i6  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

not  be  able  to  see  that  as  it  is  set  forth  by  St.  Paul,  or, 
perhaps  we  should  say,  as  it  has  been  popularly  expounded, 
but  they  would  feel  its  attractiveness  as  it  is  revealed  by 
St.  John.  There  they  would  see  that  what  we  value  above 
all  things  is  not  the  spirit  of  conquest,  but  the  spirit  of  self- 
sacrificing  love.  "The  Cross  of  Christ,"  it  has  been  finely 
said,  "  touched  the  common  heart  of  humanity.  It  awak- 
ened a  new  sense  of  brotherhood  in  all  men  of  all  classes 
and  nationalities,  so  that  henceforth  in  their  deeper  inter- 
ests they  were  one.'*  *  The  same  effect  would  be  pro- 
duced to-day.  That  is  why  the  ministrations  of  the  physi- 
cian have  made  so  deep  an  impression  upon  the  heathen, 
while  they  have  seemed  indifferent  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
preacher.  A  highly  educated  Japanese,  not  a  Christian, 
told  me  that  it  was  almost  impossible  for  the  Japanese  to 
believe  in  disinterested  love,  and  could  not  understand  the 
Christian  attitude.  But  he  admitted  that  it  was  beauti- 
ful. What  Christian  man  who  has  felt  the  constraining 
love  of  Christ,  or  what  man  who  knows  anything  of  the 
history  of  the  church,  can  doubt  that  all  men  would  feel 
the  attraction  of  self-sacrificing  love,  and  so  that  in  this 
day  Christ,  ''lifted  up,"  would  draw  men  unto  him? 
Therein  lies  our  hope. 

But  hope  is  increased  by  a  quickening  of  the  imagina- 
tion. How  little  there  is  in  the  ordinary  mission  report 
to  touch  the  imagination !  Too  often  we  feel  its  pettiness. 
May  that  not  be  due  in  part  to  the  fact  that  our  only 
means  of  knowing  of  the  work  the  churches  are  doing  in 
the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  is  the  denominational 
paper  which  reports  what  its  own  ministers  and  workers 
are  doing  with  no  hint  that  others  are  doing  the  same?  If 
there  were  one  great  missionary  journal  which  kept  the 
people  at  home  informed  of  what  all  the  churches  were 
doing,  there  would  be  a  revival  of  interest  as  the  result  of 
the  larger  aspect  of  the  work  which  would  in  that  way  be 
*  "The  Fourth  Gospel,"  E.  F.  Scott. 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES         17 

recorded.  I  have  listened  to  many  reports  from  returned 
missionaries,  but  I  confess  I  have  never  had  my  imagina- 
tion so  quickened  as  by  the  account  of  the  late  Mr.  Dun- 
can of  his  life  among  the  Metlakatla  Indians.  He  went 
out  alone  and  had  the  support  of  no  "society,"  and  wias 
opposed  by  the  bishop  of  his  own  church.  Yet  that  man, 
single-handed,  converted  a  savage  tribe  of  cannibals  into 
an  industrious,  pious.  Christian  people.  xThey  knew  noth- 
ing of  "orders"  and  little  of  "sacraments,"  *  but  they 
knew  the  love  of  God  which  passeth  knowledge,  and  they 
tried  to  serve  the  Lord  Jesus.  If  we  could  have  before  us 
the  record  of  all  that  is  being  done  by  the  many  churches, 
I  believe  there  would  come  a  hope  for  the  conversion  of 
the  world  which  we  cannot  have  while  we  are  "looking 
every  one  to  his  own  things"  and  not  regarding  the  "things 
of  others." 

There  are  two  objections  frequently  urged  against  for- 
eign missions:  one  is  from  the  church  members,  and  the 
other  is  from  those  who  have  slight  interest  in  the  church, 
whether  at  home  or  abroad.  Let  us  consider  each  of 
them. 

"The  heathen,"  we  are  told,  "are  confused  by  our  de- 
nominational differences."  It  is  not  our  differences  of 
form  of  administration  which  confuse  them.  They  are 
familiar  with  these  differences  in  the  religions  which  they 
know  among  their  own  people.  It  is  our  want  of  mutual 
love  which  shocks  them.  If  a  group  of  men  and  women 
setting  out  from  England  or  Germany  or  Scandinavia  or 
America  have  in  their  own  homes  felt  the  importance  of 

*  Mr.  Duncan  baptized,  but  he  would  not  administer  the  communion 
because  he  was  convinced  that  men  who  had  just  emerged  from  can- 
nibalism would  not  be  made  to  understand  what  "spiritual  feeding" 
means.  An  interesting  parallel  is  found  in  the  story  of  Ulphilas,  the 
great  apostle  to  the  Goths.  In  his  translation  of  the  Old  Testament 
he  omitted  the  Four  Books  of  Kings  (as  in  that  day  they  were  named) 
as  unfitted  to  such  a  turbulent  and  bloodthirsty  people.  See  Gibbon's 
"Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,"  chap.  XXXVII. 


i8  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

certain  aspects  of  truth,  it  is  only  to  be  expected  that  they 
will  work  best  by  emphasizing  those  aspects  of  truth.  Of 
course,  if  they  go  so  far  as  to  teach  the  heathen  that  those 
aspects  are  the  only  ones  which  constitute  a  true  disciple 
of  Jesus,  they  are  unfaithful  to  their  trust.  But  why 
should  it  be  supposed  that  all  Chinese  or  Japanese  will  be 
responsive  to  but  one  form  of  worship  or  doctrine?  Such 
a  theory  seems  to  partake  of  the  mistake  which  it  is  said 
the  Chinese  doctors  made  when  the  first  missionary  physi- 
cians went  to  China.  When  they  tried  to  convince  the 
Chinese  that  the  various  organs  of  the  human  body  are 
not  placed  where  the  ancient  tradition  of  the  Chinese 
asserted  they  were,  they  refused  to  believe  they  could  be 
mistaken.  The  Chinese  would  not  allow  an  autopsy  to 
be  performed  upon  one  of  their  countrymen,  so  that  for  a 
long  time  no  progress  could  be  made.  At  last  an  American 
cadaver  was  obtained  and  a  demonstration  of  the  facts 
presented  to  the  Chinese.  But  it  was  answered  that 
while  no  doubt  the  facts  were  as  the  autopsy  showed  in  the 
body  of  an  American,  the  case  was  different  with  the  Chi- 
nese! How  does  this  anatomical  heresy  differ  from  our 
ecclesiastical  heresy  which  denies  the  spiritual  unity  of  the 
race?  The  notion  that  there  are  not  embryonic  Presby- 
terians and  Methodists  and  Baptists  and  Episcopalians  in 
Asia  as  well  as  in  Europe  is  as  absurd  as  to  assert  that 
there  are  in  foreign  lands  no  differences  of  stature  among 
the  inhabitants.  Some  years  ago  a  young  Japanese  friend 
told  me  that  one  of  his  greatest  difficulties  in  first  coming 
to  America  was  to  distinguish  one  person  from  another. 
"They  all  looked  alike."  When  he  was  told  that  Ameri- 
cans found  the  same  difficulty  in  distinguishing  Japanese 
from  one  another,  he  was  astonished. 

The  church  was  ordained  to  preach  the  gospel  in  "the 
tongue  wherein  men  were  born,"  whether  that  tongue  be 
the  tongue  of  Luther  or  Calvin  or  Wesley  or  any  other  of 
the  great  teachers  of  the  church.    There  is  but  one  gospel, 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES         19 

but  the  form  which  it  will  take  will  be  determined  by  the 
differences  of  men^s  spiritual  temperaments.  If  that  truth 
were  recognized,  the  churches  would  find  it  possible  to  co- 
operate in  missionary  activities.  There  is  work  enough 
for  all.  Let  each  church  make  disciples,  and  then  it  will 
be  of  slight  consequence  what  the  subspecies  may  be  to 
which  they  shall  later  be  assigned.  If  the  churches  would 
agree  to  divide  the  field  and  from  time  to  time  meet  in 
brotherly  conference  to  tell  of  the  wonderful  things  God 
had  wrought,  they  would  be  filled  with  new  courage  to 
reconsecrate  themselves  to  the  work  of  the  spirit  and  the 
churches  at  home  would  feel  the  power  of  a  new  hope.  In 
this  way  they  could  testify  to  the  essential  unity  of  Christ's 
church  and  accomplish  more  than  can  be  now  foreseen  in 
the  conversion  of  the  world  to  Christ. 

Turn  now  to  the  consideration  of  the  objections  fre- 
quently urged  by  those  who  have  no  real  interest  in  the 
church,  but  declare  that  all  the  energy  and  wealth  spent 
in  the  attempt  to  make  the  world  Christian  are  but  lost 
labor,  and  tliat  it  would  be  better  to  divert  them  to  the 
need  at  home.  "How  hopeless  is  the  task!  When  we 
think  of  the  millions  in  India,  the  swarms  of  life  in  China, 
the  self-satisfaction  of  the  Japanese,  why  should  we  sup- 
pose they  will  listen  to  our  message?  The  East  is  not 
receptive  to  Western  ideals.  It  is  satisfied  with  its  own 
religion."  How  belated  all  this  sounds !  The  East  is  very 
receptive  to  Western  ideals.  If  it  were  not  so,  would  these 
same  men  be  so  much  interested  in  the  "open  door"  in 
China?  Western  clothes,  inventions,  books,  science,  are 
eagerly  sought  in  all  parts  of  the  East  to-day.  Why  should 
it  be  supposed  that  they  would  not  be  glad  to  receive  the 
best  we  have  if  we  made  the  same  effort  to  introduce  it  as 
we  make  to  introduce  our  manufactured  goods? 

The  men  who  assert  that  the  East  is  satisfied  with  its 
religion  show  ignorance  of  the  facts.  The  East  is  not  sat- 
isfied with  its  religions.    The  state  of  affairs  in  Asia  to-day 


20  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

is  strikingly  like  that  of  Europe  in  the  time  of  Paul.  The 
old  gods  are  being  deserted.  The  educated  people  in  every 
land  scoff  at  them.  The  poor  and  ignorant,  the  peas- 
ants, still  do  sacrifice  to  them  from  time  to  time,  because 
of  superstitious  fear.  "Who  can  tell?  There  may  be 
gods  and  they  may  have  power  to  destroy  the  harvest  or 
sicken  the  cattle  or  take  the  lives  of  the  children.  It  is 
best  to  keep  in  with  them."  Nevertheless,  the  contact 
between  the  West  and  the  East  has  produced  a  deep  scep- 
ticism, and  the  gods  are  losing  their  power  and  men  are 
turning  sadly  away  from  their  worship.  The  scepticism 
which  we  have  produced  calls  on  us  to  bring  in  a  living 
faith.  If  we  do  not,  then  the  experiences  of  Asia  will  be 
like  that  of  the  man  in  the  parable  who  deserted  his  house, 
went  out  into  the  waste  places,  and  then,  weary  of  wander- 
ing, turned  homeward.  The  house  was  swept  and  gar- 
nished. Everything  familiar  had  gone.  Who  could  endure 
such  loneliness  in  the  midst  of  this  mysterious  universe? 
"He  went  out  and  took  to  himself  seven  other  spirits 
more  wicked  than  himself,  and  the  last  state  of  the  man 
was  worse  than  the  first."  So  may  it  well  be  with  a  nation 
dissatisfied  with  its  ancient  religion.  Man  is  "incurably 
religious";  if  when  these  people  returned  to  their  house  of 
religion  they  found  it  not  empty  but  filled  with  the  spirit 
of  Jesus,  would  they  not  welcome  him?  There  are  pro- 
found questions,  both  ethical  and  philosophical,  which 
must  be  adjusted — just  as  there  were  in  the  Roman  Empire 
when  the  gospel  was  first  preached.  But  those  must  wait. 
The  immediate  need  is  to  convince  the  world  that  God  is 
witn  it.  Let  any  man  who  is  sceptical  of  the  present  in- 
fluence of  Christ  in  heathendom  read  "Modern  Religious 
Movements  in  India,"  *  and  he  may  learn  what  the  para- 
ble of  the  leaven  means.  There  is  no  record  of  "conver- 
sions," but  rather  the  record  of  the  various  religious  move- 
ments which  have  arisen  as  the  result  of  the  example  of 
*  J.  N.  Farquhar. 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES         21 

missionary  activities  which  are  profoundly  affecting  the 
life  of  India  much  in  the  same  way  as  the  preaching  of  the 
gospel  affected  Europe.  There  is  not  only  imitation;  there 
is  also  hostility.  And  the  latter  is  showing  itself  in  an 
attempt  to  revive  the  ancient  worship,  just  as  Julian  the 
Apostate  tried  to  revive  the  dying  paganism  of  his  day. 
But  that  attempt,  as  well  as  this,  is  a  sign  of  the  decline 
of  the  power  of  the  old  religions.  The  student  of  Chris- 
tian history  will  see  that  in  India,  as  in  Europe,  no  revival 
of  the  ancient  cult  can  be  permanent  because  there  are  in 
it  inherent  weaknesses  which  can  be  cured  only  by  the 
acknowledgment  of  Jesus  as  Lord  and  Master. 

We  have  heard  many  stirring  sermons  on  the  "man 
from  Macedonia"  and  his  cry,  "Come  over  and  help  us," 
but  have  we  realized  that  the  great  apostle's  decision  to 
pass  from  Asia  meant  also  a  change  of  method?  When 
Paul  and  Barnabas  preached  in  Lycaonia  they  were  preach- 
ing to  idolaters,  who  "brought  oxen  and  garlands  to  do 
sacrifice,"  but  when  Paul  passed  over  to  Greece,  while  he 
still  met  idolaters,  he  also  met  "philosophers"  and  learned 
that  the  message  must  now  be  given  in  a  different  way. 

The  early  missionaries  went  forth  to  preach  to  idolaters, 
to  the  "heathen  in  their  blindness,  bowing  down  to  wood 
and  stone."  But  there  has  come  a  great  change  in  the 
heathen  world  as  the  result  of  the  contact  between  East 
and  West.  There  are  thousands  of  educated  men,  and 
some  women,  in  India,  China,  and  Japan,  who  have  been 
influenced  by  the  lives  of  Christian  missionaries,  who  have 
been  educated  in  the  universities  of  Europe  and  America, 
who  cannot  be  called  idolaters,  but  theists,  and  yet  do  not 
know  what  the  worship  of  God  as  spirit  reaUy  means. 
The  message  of  the  church  must  now  be  carried  to  them. 
The  old  complaint,  that  converts  were  made  only  among 
the  "coolies,"  has  no  longer  force. 

How  is  that  message  to  be  given?  Many  of  the  men, 
destined  to  be  the  leaders  of  the  people,  are  filled  with  the 


22  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

scientific  spirit  of  the  West.  They  will  not  accept  a  part 
of  the  gospel,  the  tradition  with  which  we  are  familiar,  and 
which  we  are  able  to  use  as  the  temporary  husk  of  the 
kernel  of  truth.  They  must  be  approached  in  a  new  way 
— though,  indeed,  it  is  the  old  way  in  which  Jesus  trained 
the  fiirst  disciples.  ''Tell  us  plainly,"  said  some  of  the 
men  to  whom  he  preached,  "if  thou  be  the  Christ."  But 
he  did  not  tell  them  "plainly";  he  pointed  to  certain  facts, 
"the  works  that  he  did  in  his  father's  name,"  and  left  them 
to  draw  their  own  conclusions.  In  other  words,  he  fol- 
lowed what  we  now  call  the  scientific  method,  from  the 
known  to  the  unknown.  This  is  what  the  church  must 
now  do.  "The  mist  of  centuries  has  cleared  away,  and 
once  more  we  behold  the  Man,  the  Teacher,  the  Friend, 
the  Hero,  the  Revealer  of  the  more  Excellent  Way,  and 
we  feel  that  in  Jesus  we  have  the  pledge  and  proof  that 
humanity  is  capable  of  realizing  its  ideal.  Orthodox  reli- 
gious teachers  have  been  so  anxiously  occupied  in  safe- 
guarding the  Divinity  of  Christ  that  they  have  almost  for- 
gotten the  Humanity.  I  would  urge  them  to  make  sure  of 
the  Humanity  and  the  Divinity  will  make  sure  of  itself."  * 
The  East  for  centuries  has  meditated  on  the  mystery  of  the 
Godhead,  but  now,  by  its  contact  with  the  West,  it  has 
awakened  to  a  new  sense  of  the  power  of  man.  If  the 
modem  missionary  can  show  what  we  mean  when  we 
speak  of  man,  he  will  also  show  what  we  mean  by  God. 
For  all  that  we  know  about  God  has  come  through  the 
man  Christ  Jesus.  But  in  our  efforts  to  deliver  that  mes- 
sage, we  must  approach  the  heathen  from  their  point  of 
view,  not  from  ours. 

When  Paul  preached  on  Mars  Hill  he  did  not  quote  the 
Hebrew  prophets  but  the  Greek  poets.  He  tried  to  show 
that  in  Jesus  the  ideal  of  Greece  was  fulfilled.  The  church 
to-day  need  not  make  the  mistake  of  Marcion  and  repudi- 

*  "Jesus,  Human  and  Divine,"  J.  F.  Bethune-Baker  in  The  Modern 
Churchman,  Sept.,  1921. 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES         23 

ate  the  Old  Testament  as  if  it  had  no  value,  but  it  cannot 
be  expected  that  it  can  have  the  same  preparatory  value 
in  India,  China,  and  Japan  that  it  had  for  the  Jews  or  even 
for  Christians  brought  up  to  reverence  it  as  the  inerrant 
word  of  God.  There  are  treasures  of  spiritual  literature 
in  the  heathen  world  which  bear  witness  to  the  kinship 
between  God  and  man  which  is  the  foundation  of  the  reve- 
lation of  Jesus.  It  is  to  those  the  missionary  must  turn  to 
show  that  the  discipleship  of  Jesus  does  not  mean  that 
they  are  to  deny  that  God  has  spoken  to  their  fathers. 
The  church  must  learn  from  the  Theosophist.  "The  Theo- 
sophical  Society,''  says  one  who  speaks  with  authority  on 
the  religious  condition  of  India,  "is  first  of  all  sympathetic 
to  all  religions.  It  has  assumed  a  generous  attitude,  the 
attitude  of  appreciation  and  friendship.  Nor  is  that  all. 
The  society  .  .  .  invites  men  and  women  to  come  and 
enjoy  the  rich  feast  which  Oriental  religions  offer  to  the 
student.  .  .  .  They  have  usually  filled  men's  heads  with 
froth  instead  of  knowledge.  Yet  the  fact  remains  that 
they  have  attempted  to  do  in  a  wrong  way  what  the 
Church  of  Christ  ought  to  have  done  in  the  right  way. 
This  is  unquestionably  the  first  attraction  which  Theoso- 
phy  presents  to  the  outsider;  and  it  is  the  attraction  which 
has  drawn  to  it  the  great  majority  of  the  more  intellectual 
men  who  at  one  time  or  another  have  belonged  to  it."  * 

No  obscurantist  theology  will  appeal  to  educated  men 
in  heathendom  any  more  than  it  appeals  to  educated  men 
in  Christendom.  But  a  gospel  which  is  not  confused  by 
myths,  but  is  the  declaration  of  the  man  in  whom  we  see 
God,  is  the  need  and  the  hope  of  the  world  to-day  as  it 
has  ever  been.  When  the  church  recognizes  that  this  is 
the  work  it  is  called  upon  to  do,  there  will  be  a  revival  of 
the  spirit  of  missions  and  a  revival  of  the  hope  and  power 
of  the  church. 

•"Modern  Religious  Movements  in  India,"  J.  N.  Farquhar,  pp. 
286-287. 


24  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

From  the  third  to  the  fifth  century  the  church  was  en- 
gaged in  interpreting  the  gospel  in  terms  of  Greek  philoso- 
phy. Ecclesiastical  historians  would  lead  us  to  suppose 
that  this  was  the  only  work  that  the  church  was  doing, 
just  as  secular  historians  have  led  to  the  belief  that  the 
history  of  the  world  is  the  history  of  courts  and  armies. 
We  are  coming  to  learn  that  the  history  of  the  people  has 
still  to  be  written.  Multitudes  of  men  and  women  of 
whom  the  world  was  not  worthy  were  being  converted 
while  the  great  councils  were  formulating  the  creeds.  This 
philosophic  work  of  the  church  was  interrupted  by  the 
barbarian  incursion,  and,  as  a  result,  we  have  concluded 
that  the  work  was  completed.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was 
interrupted,  and  now,  after  the  darkness  of  the  Dark 
Ages,  and  the  confusion  of  mediaevalism,  when  the  great 
teachers  of  the  church  did  no  more  than  attempt  to  adjust 
the  "deposit  of  faith"  to  the  teachings  of  Aristotle,  and 
later  the  reformers  were  trying  to  put  the  old  wine  into  the 
new  bottles  of  the  sixteenth  century,  a  new  conception  of 
the  universe  and  of  man  had  taken  possession  of  men's 
thoughts.  That  new  conception  has  penetrated  the  hea- 
then world,  and,  as  a  consequence,  there  has  arisen  a  prob- 
lem with  which  the  early  missionaries  were  not  called 
upon  to  deal. 

The  position  of  the  churches  to-day  differs  from  that  of 
the  church  of  the  second  century  in  one  important  particu- 
lar which  must  affect  its  work.  The  Roman  Empire  at 
first  protected  the  church — partly,  no  doubt,  because  of 
indifference.  Then  it  persecuted,  and  at  last  succumbed. 
But  the  relation  of  the  churches  to  the  state  to-day  is  not 
that  of  a  foreign  body  to  an  external  government;  it  is  the 
relation  of  a  part  of  the  community  to  its  own  servant,  yet 
the  need  of  the  influence  of  the  churches  upon  the  govern- 
ment is  as  great  to-day  as  ever,  though  it  must  be  exercised 
in  a  different  way. 

This  brings  us  face  to  face  with  a  question  which  we  do 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES         2$ 

not  like  to  consider:  Is  modem  civilization  worth  saving, 
and,  if  so,  is  it  any  part  of  the  church's  work  to  save  it  ? 
Tolstoy  firmly  believed  that  it  was  necessary  to  destroy 
modem  civilization  because  it  was  anti-Christ.  He  ignored 
the  whole  history  of  the  church  and  insisted  that  the  Ser- 
mon on  the  Mount  was  the  revelation  of  the  new  law  of 
himian  society.  That  the  precepts  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  cannot  be  the  law  of  society  is  evident.  Shall, 
then,  society  be  destroyed,  or  shall  we  abandon  the  Chris- 
tian law?  That  seems  to  be  the  dilemma  from  which 
there  is  no  escape.  One  hom  of  the  dilemma  is  taken  by 
those  whom  it  is  the  fashion  to  speak  of  as  "parlor  an- 
archists." The  other  has  been  seized  by  the  Soviet  govem- 
ment  in  Russia.  The  escape  is  to  be  found  not  by  ignor- 
ing either  hom  of  the  dilemma,  but  by  a  synthesis  which 
will  enable  us  to  rise  above  the  controversy  by  a  better 
understanding  of  the  problem.  This,  I  believe,  is  being 
done  by  those  who  have  studied  the  words  of  our  Saviour 
more  carefully  than  had  been  done  in  the  past.  They 
have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  is  not  to  be  taken  as  a  new  law  which  should  be 
enforced  in  all  circumstances  and  applied  to  groups  of 
men.  They  believe  it  is  the  setting  forth  of  an  ideal  which 
the  individual  must  endeavor  to  reach  in  his  own  life  and 
gradually  impart  to  all  men,  who  then  will  endeavor  to 
realize  the  ideal  in  every  relation  of  life.  The  exhortation 
to  turn  the  other  cheek  when  smitten  on  the  first  is 
probably  an  example  of  that  same  ironic  humor  which  ex- 
pressed itself  in  the  figure  of  the  camel  and  the  eye  of 
the  needle.* 

Suppose,  then,  with  this  thought  of  our  Saviour's  teach- 
ing we  approach  our  problem,  not  desiring  to  lower  the 
ideal,  but  in  the  hope  of  finding  a  way  in  which  the  ideal 
might  be  made  more  effective  than  it  is  at  present,  and 
ask:  What  do  we  mean  by  civilization?  If  we  mean  the 
*  See  "Jesus  in  the  Experience  of  Men,"  T.  R,  Glover. 


26  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

statecraft  which  the  war  has  discredited,  the  materialistic 
conception  of  life  which  has  vulgarized  society,  the  ugly 
industrialism  which  has  covered  the  fields  with  smoking 
factories  and  the  cities  of  festering  slums,  the  fierce  strug- 
gle between  capital  and  labor,  a  godless  education,  the 
commercialized  wars  for  the  exploitation  of  the  backward 
peoples,  then,  indeed.  Christian  men  may  say  that  they 
have  no  desire  to  save  it,  that  it  can  be  no  work  of  the 
church  to  serve  it.  But  if  we  look  on  these  things  which 
we  condemn  as  blots  and  blemishes,  indeed,  but  no  essen- 
tial element  of  civilized  life,  and  define  civilization  as  a 
system  of  life  which  should  lead  to  reverence  of  law,  which 
strives  to  organize  government  for  the  protection  of  life, 
liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  which  would  enrich 
life  by  beauty  and  make  it  sweeter  and  healthier  and  more 
prosperous;  in  other  words,  if  the  ideal  be  a  common- 
wealth, which  can  be  established  and  maintained  only  by 
the  abolition  of  dynasties  and  special  privileges,  then  we 
have  in  mind  an  ideal  which  prophets  and  kings  have 
desired  to  see  and  have  not  seen,  but  which  those  who  fol- 
low Jesus  believe  he  would  have  rejoiced  to  see,  which 
John  the  Divine  saw  in  his  vision  of  the  City  of  God  "com- 
ing down  out  of  heaven  like  a  bride  adorned  for  her  hus- 
band/' 

Such  a  hope  is  worthy  of  a  Christian  man;  such  a  work 
it  is  the  mission  of  the  church  to  accomplish,  and  so  con- 
ceived it  becomes  an  inspiration.  It  does  not  lead  us  to 
think  that  the  heathen  are  to  be  converted  in  order  that 
they  may  be  taken  out  of  the  world,  but  rather  that  they 
may  play  their  part  in  the  world  as  brethren  and  heirs  of 
the  promise.  But  when  they  ask  for  an  example  of  what 
we  mean  by  a  nobler  social  life  than  they  have  enjoyed, 
can  we  say  that  it  is  to  be  found  in  Western  civilization  as 
it  exists  to-day?  We  know  that  we  cannot.  We  know 
that  the  great  obstacle  to  the  conversion  of  the  world  to 
Christ  is  the  example  of  the  so-called  Christian  nations. 


\      THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCHES         27 

Thereiore,  the  conversion  of  the  world  demands  the  spiri- 
tualization  of  civilization,  and,  we  believe,  there  is  no 
organization  except  the  Christian  church  which  lives  for 
that  purpose.  If  this  be  true,  then  it  follows  that  the 
church  has  an  intimate  interest  in  and  responsibility  for 
the  political,  social,  industrial,  and  educational  life  of  the 
community,  as  well  as  for  the  individuals  who  have  al- 
ready entered  into  its  communion. 

To  treat  of  these  subjects  in  detail  would  require  the 
writing  of  another  book  and  a  knowledge  to  which  I  lay 
no  claim.  But  there  are  certain  things  which  the  churches 
and  the  churches  alone  can  do,  to  which  attention  may 
properly  be  called. 


CHAPTER  in 
THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

To  speak  of  the  task  of  the  churches  as  something  dif- 
ferent from  the  mission  of  the  churches  may  seem  to 
some  a  distinction  without  a  difference.  But  I  do  not  so 
understand  it.  The  difference  may  be  compared  to  that 
between  "strategy*'  and  "tactics."  The  former,  which  is 
allied  to  the  root  "scatter/'  deals  with  those  problems 
which  arise  when  the  army  has  taken  the  field,  while  the 
latter  is  concerned  with  the  preliminary  training  which  fits 
the  army  for  the  campaign.  In  the  same  way,  we  speak 
of  the  mission  of  the  church  as  its  work  in  the  scattered 
parts  of  the  world,  and  of  its  task  as  the  work  which  must 
be  done  at  home. 

The  first  question  which  the  churches  should  ask  them- 
selves is  one  that  the  heathen  insist  upon  our  answering: 
Who  are  we  to  represent  Jesus?  Do  not  the  words  of  the 
Psalmist  apply  to  the  Christian  nations?  "Unto  the  un- 
godly said  God:  Why  dost  thou  preach  my  laws,  and  tak- 
est  my  covenant  in  thy  mouth;  whereas  thou  hatest  to  be 
reformed:  and  hast  cast  my  words  behind  thee?  When 
thou  sawest  a  thief,  thou  consentedst  unto  him:  and  hast 
been  partaker  with  the  adulterers.  .  .  .  These  things 
hast  thou  done,  and  I  held  my  tongue,  and  thou  thoughtest 
wickedly,  that  I  am  even  such  a  one  as  thyself:  but  I  will 
reprove  thee,  and  set  before  thee  the  things  that  thou 
hast  done.  O  consider  this,  ye  that  forget  God:  lest  I 
pluck  you  away,  and  there  be  none  to  deliver  you.  .  .  . 
To  him  that  ordereth  his  conversation  right,  will  I  show 
the  salvation  of  God."  * 

*  Psalm  50  :  16-23,  Prayer-Book  version. 
28 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES  29 

Can  it  be  claimed  that  this  country  has  ordered  its  "con- 
versation," that  is,  its  life,  right,  so  that  it  can  claim  to 
be  an  example  to  the  world?  We  have  only  to  consider 
what  must  be  familiar  to  all  to  answer  that  question. 

When  we  admit  to  ourselves  that  with  all  our  boasting 
of  "triumphant  democracy,''  the  great  cities  of  the  land, 
yes,  and  towns  and  villages  as  well,  are  not  enjoying  "gov- 
ernment of  the  people,  for  the  people,  by  the  people,"  but 
of,  and  by,  and  for,  the  bosses,  we  may  be  led  to  ask  our- 
selves whether  the  church  is  in  any  way  responsible. 
When  we  boast  of  the  security  we  enjoy  under  the  Consti- 
tution of  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  we 
might  remember  the  desperate  state  of  the  negro  in  this 
land.  Is  the  burning  of  widows  on  the  pyre  of  their  hus- 
bands, sometimes,  we  are  assured,  with  their  own  consent, 
worse  than  the  burning  of  negroes,  not  infrequently  on 
the  mere  suspicion  of  crime — a  proof  of  the  brotherhood 
proclaimed  by  Jesus?  Is  polygamy  a  greater  social  evil 
than  facile  divorce?  Are  the  feuds  between  the  tongs  in 
China  worse  than  the  ruthless  war  between  capital  and 
labor  in  all  the  great  industrial  centres  of  this  land?  Is 
the  preaching  of  a  debased  form  of  patriotism,  which  ex- 
presses itself  in  the  immoral  dictum,  "My  country,  right 
or  wrong,"  never  heard  from  Christian  pulpits?  Have  the 
churches  used  their  influence  to  lessen  the  excessive  arma- 
ments which  are  crushing  the  world  with  the  weight  of 
taxation,  or  are  they  leaving  it  to  the  diplomats — the 
"professional  politicians" — whose  statecraft  brought  on 
the  World  War?  Such  questions  as  these  are  being  asked 
by  serious-minded  men  in  India,  China,  and  Japan,  as  well 
as  in  Europe  and  America.  We  may  think  that  they  are 
put  in  a  way  that  implies  that  Western  civilization  is  noth- 
ing less  than  organized  hypocrisy,  and  so  turn  from  them 
as  not  worthy  of  the  consideration  of  respectable  men. 
But  we  may  not  so  easily  escape.  The  same  questions  are 
being  asked  in  all  the  colleges,  and  are  disquieting  to  those 


30  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

who  believe  that  they  are  living  in  the  best  of  all  possible 
worlds.  They  are  especially  disquieting  to  those  who  be- 
lieve that  there  can  be  a  return  to  the  economic  and  politi- 
cal conditions  with  which  they  were  familiar  before  the 
Great  War. 

There  is  one  question  with  which  the  Christian  nations 
are  called  upon  to  deal  before  they  can  carry  the  gospel  of 
human  brotherhood  to  the  nations,  and  that  is  the  relation 
of  so-called  Christian  nations  to  one  another.  An  attempt 
was  made  soon  after  the  armistice  to  deal  with  this  ques- 
tion, and  the  result  was  the  Treaty  of  Versailles  and  the 
Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations.  We  need  not  beat 
again  the  old  straw  of  the  controversy  to  which  these  led. 
The  problem  which  Christian  men  must  solve,  and  which 
the  politicians  can  never  solve,  is  how  a  Christian  interna- 
tionalism can  grow  out  of  our  national  patriotism  without 
destroying  the  root  of  patriotism.  In  order  to  solve  that 
problem  it  is  not  necessary  to  adopt  the  theories  of  the 
Third  Internationale,  but  it  is  necessary  to  recognize  the 
truth  which  lies  in  the  protest  of  the  Soviet  government 
against  "capitalism." 

The  churches  and  the  churches  alone  can  accomplish 
this  work  because,  while  the  churches  are  composed  of  men 
and  women  who  are  also  citizens,  the  churches  can  lead 
them  on  to  higher  ground  than  the  politician  can  reach. 
The  churches  have  it  in  their  power  to  create  a  righteous 
public  opinion  which  will  profoundly  affect  the  course  of 
public  events.  (I  say  public  opiniofij  not  public  emotion, 
though  the  two  are  often  confused.)  In  order  to  do  that, 
it  is  necessary  to  reconsider  the  meaning  of  patriotism. 
There  was  not  a  country  of  Europe  which  was  not  poisoned 
by  the  same  virus  which  led  to  the  downfall  of  Germany 
— ^nor  has  this  country  been  altogether  free  from  the  same 
evil.  The  chauvinism  which  expressed  its  fierce  emotion 
in  the  cry  "Deutschland  iiber  alles,"  rather  than  Germany 
for  all,  if  the  people  happened  to  speak  German,  has  been 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES  31 

heard  in  every  tongue  and  in  every  land.  Is  it  not  time  to 
ask  ourselves  for  what  purpose  this  emotion  of  patriotism 
has  been  used?  The  Soviets  declare  that  it  is  excited  by 
the  capitalists  to  further  their  own  selfish  purpose.  Echoes 
of  that  were  heard  in  this  land  when  at  last  America  de- 
cided to  enter  into  the  Great  War.  Not  a  few  declared 
that  this  war,  like  all  wars,  was  a  capitalistic  war.  The 
men  of  property  who  knew  what  war  would  mean  to  the 
capitalists,  by  the  destruction  of  property,  the  ruin  of  cus- 
tomers, the  unsettling  of  credit,  and  the  shaking  of  the 
delicate  instrument  of  exchange,  were  not  unnaturally  in- 
dignant at  such  a  charge.  But  now  that  the  fighting  has 
ceased,  should  we  not  seriously  consider  if  there  be  not 
more  truth  in  the  charge  than  we  were  at  that  time  ready 
to  acknowledge?  Voltaire  said  that  as  the  wars  of  the 
Old  World  had  been  caused  by  religious  hatred  and  dynas- 
tic ambitions,  so  the  wars  of  the  future  would  be  economic. 
Is  not  that  true?  From  the  "Opimn  War"  in  China  to 
the  Great  War  of  the  world,  has  not  the  real  cause  been 
economic?  The  late  war  was  not  a  capitalistic  war  in  the 
sense  that  the  capitalists  expected  personal  gain  from  it, 
but  was  it  not  a  capitalistic  war  in  the  sense  that  it  was 
capital  invested  in  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth — 
Africa,  for  example — ^which  the  capitalist  wished  to  pro- 
tect, which  utilized  the  pure  sentiment  of  patriotism? 
The  danger  has  not  ceased.  There  is  coal  and  iron  in 
Siberia  which  all  the  great  industrial  nations  need.  Which 
shall  have  the  monopoly  of  this  rich  and  undeveloped 
country,  and  how  can  that  be  insured  except  by  war? 
The  "proletariat"  of  the  world  is  declaring  that  it  will 
no  longer  be  used  for  exploitation.  This  conflict  between 
"interests"  may  lead  to  revolution  in  Europe  and  America. 
What  can  the  churches  do?  They  can  begin  to  reveal  a 
nobler  patriotism  which  conceives  of  national  greatness  in 
terms  of  world-wide  service.  They  can  preach  with  power 
the  forgotten  message  of  Jesus,  that  "A  man's  life  consist- 


32  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

eth  not  in  the  abundance  of  the  things  which  he  possesses"; 
they  can  dare  to  set  themselves  against  the  degradation  of 
the  pure  emotion  of  patriotism  and  inspire  it  to  be  the 
means  of  a  nobler  international  fellowship  which  will  lead 
to  the  abolition  of  war. 

This  will  be  no  easy  task,  and  it  cannot  be  accomplished 
in  a  day,  nor  in  a  generation.  But  if  it  be  not  begun  with- 
out delay,  the  world  as  we  know  it  will  perish. 

The  churches  will  find  themselves  opposed  by  a  pagan 
heresy  which  is  having  a  profound  influence.  That  heresy 
expresses  itself  in  some  such  way  as  this:  "All  this  talk 
about  universal  peace  is  futile  because  war  is  inevitable. 
You  cannot  abolish  war,  because  you  cannot  change  human 
nature."  If  this  be  true,  and  war  is  inevitable,  then  the 
destruction  of  Western  civilization  is  inevitable.  It  is  true 
that  war  cannot  be  abolished  without  a  change  in  human 
nature.  But  that  statement,  so  far  from  discouraging, 
should  be  a  challenge  to  the  churches,  and  remind  them 
that  a  change  in  human  nature  was  what  Jesus  came  to 
accomplish.  "Ye  must  be  born  again,"  was  the  solemn 
beginning  of  Jesus*  preaching;  "If  any  man  be  in  Christ 
Jesus,  he  is  a  new  creation,"  was  the  joyful  cry  of  Paul 
^when  he  had  been  baptized  into  the  spirit  of  his  Lord. 
Nothing  less  than  to  change  human  nature  is  the  task  of 
the  church  of  the  living  God.  Human  nature  does  not 
mean  that  to  the  end  of  time  humanity  must  be  influenced 
by  the  same  ideals  and  experiences  with  no  increase  of 
spiritual  power.  If  that  were  true,  there  would  have  been 
no  history.  Man  would  never  have  descended  from  his 
arboreal  habitations.  But  such  has  not  been  the  fact. 
There  are  certain  appetites  and  temptations  which  assail 
men  and  women  to-day  as  they  did  of  old.  But  let  any 
man  read  the  first  chapter  of  Romans  and  ask  himself  if 
that  is  the  picture  of  the  world  to-day  where  the  gospel  of 
Jesus  has  been  preached.  Has  there  been  no  change,  not 
alone  in  the  ideal  but  in  the  power  to  come  nearer  to  the 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES  33 

ideal  since  Paul  wrote  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  Corinthi- 
ans? "The  greatest  of  all  is  love."  How  many  believed 
that  when  Paul  wrote?  How  few  deny  it  to-day?  Has 
that  change  of  ideal  had  no  influence  in  changing  life? 
"Nature"  means  not  what  is  but  what  is  "becoming," 
what  is  about  to  be.  So  defined,  it  is  true  that  it  cannot 
be  changed  nor  does  any  good  man  desire  to  change  it. 
But  to  assert  that  the  sins  and  weaknesses  of  this  mortal 
nature  cannot  be  purified  is  to  deny  the  facts  of  life.  At 
any  rate,  the  issue  is  clearly  joined.  The  task  of  the 
church  is  to  "change  human  nature."  If  it  cannot  do 
that,  it  is  of  small  consequence  what  else  it  does.  The  day 
was  when  it  was  "natural"  to  adore  Tiberius  Caesar,  to 
think  of  slavery  as  the  foundation  of  society,  to  look  on 
women  as  made  for  the  lust  or  convenience  of  men,  to 
think  of  children  as  an  encumbrance  rather  than  as  the 
gift  of  God,  to  find  joy  in  gladiatorial  shows,  to  contem- 
plate an  endless  hell  of  physical  torture  with  equanimity, 
to  vindicate  honor  by  duelling,  to — ^but  why  continue  the 
catalogue? 

We  have  heard  men  say  that  all  these  facts  prove  is,  not 
that  human  nature  can  be  changed,  but  simply  that  the 
fashion  of  wickedness  changes;  that  the  same  passions 
which  exhibited  themselves  in  gross  forms,  which  now  dis- 
gust us,  are  to  be  seen  in  more  refined  form  to-day;  that 
there  has  been  no  essential  change  in  the  characteristics  of 
humanity.  Well,  that,  I  suppose,  is  the  truth  which  lies 
in  the  dogma  of  "original  sin."  The  temptations  of  the 
flesh  persist.  But  a  habit  of  righteousness  having  been 
once  established,  those  impulses  to  evil  remain  as  do  cer- 
tain obsolete  organs  in  the  human  body.  Not  a  few  of 
these  no  longer  function  and  others  are  being  eradicated 
by  modem  surgery.  We  are  so  exercised  with  the  problem 
of  intemperance  that  we  find  it  difficult  to  believe  that 
gluttony  was  one  of  the  most  debasing  habits  of  the  best 
society  in  ancient  Rome.    The  healthy  appetite  for  food 


34  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

has  not  been  extinguished,  but  gluttony  is  rare  in  civilized 
society.  Now,  has  the  inhibition  of  gluttony,  which  has 
produced  a  new  social  habit,  had  no  effect  upon  the  spiri- 
tual life  of  man  ?  No  student  of  psychology  would  assert 
such  a  thing.  If  the  habit  of  war  could  be  inhibited  by 
the  influence  of  a  nobler  conception  than  human  nature 
has  hitherto  attained,  the  habit  of  peace  would  succeed 
and,  as  a  result,  human  nature  would  be  changed,  first  in 
its  acts  and  then  in  its  spirit.* 

A  practical  way  in  which  the  churches  might  make  their 
influence  felt  in  an  effort  to  establish  peace  would  be  in 
the  matter  of  disarmament.  There  will  be  strong  opposi- 
tion and  specious  arguments  to  be  met.  Christian  men  in 
army  and  navy,  as  noble,  sincere,  and  devout  as  the  late 
Admiral  Mahan,  as  well  as  greedy  manufacturers  of  mu- 
nitions, and  ship-builders,  employing  thousands  of  work- 
men, will  not  be  slack  in  advocating  the  continuance 
of  what  they  will  claim  to  be  essential  for  national  se- 
curity. For  the  moment  they  may  keep  silent  because 
they  think  the  time  unpropitious,  but  when  the  news- 
papers have  taken  up  a  new  cause  and  public  sentiment 
has  begun  to  subside,  they  will  again  make  themselves 
heard,  in  books  and  magazines,  as  well  as  in  the  lobby 
of  Congress.  Let  us  hope,  however,  that  never  again 
will  they  have  the  help  of  the  churches.  Of  one  thing 
I  think  we  may  be  sure,  and  that  is  that  we  shall  not  soon 
again  hear  such  sermons  as  we  once  heard  from  preach- 
ers on  the  *' strong  man  armed."  The  irony  of  that  parable 
is,  I  think,  being  at  last  appreciated.  A  reading  of  the 
context  has  shown  that  the  "strong  man,"  who  we  were 
assured  by  preachers,  both  clerical  and  lay,  should  be  our 
example,  is  Beelzebub !  "The  strong  man  armed  keepeth 
his  palace  and  his  goods  are  at  peace.''  It  did  not  need  the 
Divine  Teacher  to  convince  us  of  that  obvious  fact.    But 

*  If  any  one  is  inclined  to  think  that  this  is  the  opinion  of  senti- 
mentalists, let  him  read  Huxley's  "Romanes  Lecture,"  1893. 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES  35 

it  did  need  One  speaking  with  authority  to  tell  us  what  it 
seems  so  difficult  to  learn,  the  inevitable  fate  of  the  strong 
man  who  trusts  in  his  armor.  "His  goods  are  in  peace, 
until  a  stronger  than  he  shall  come  upon  him  and  over- 
come him  and  take  from  him  all  his  armor  and  divide  his 
spoils."  What  a  commentary  on  this  is  found  in  the  fate 
of  Germany  and  its  Kaiser !  What  modem  nation  has  so 
trusted  in  its  armor,  and  what  so  grievously  spoiled !  That 
must  always  be  the  fate  of  such  a  strong  man  armed.  His 
very  armor  in  which  he  trusts  is  his  undoing;  it  is  an  incen- 
tive to  others  to  surpass  him  in  armaments. 

Is  it  not  time  for  the  church  to  "put  to  silence  the  igno- 
rance of  foolish  men"  who  prate  about  the  necessity  for 
dreadnoughts  and  lethal  gasses  for  national  security? 
"Who  will  harm  you  if  you  do  that  which  is  right  ?"  Per- 
haps some  man  may  attempt  to  do  so,  and  it  may  be  the 
duty  of  the  nation  to  defend  itself  from  attack,  but  how 
much  more  likely  is  such  an  attack  to  come  if  it  be  seen 
that  instead  of  doing  right  we  are  preparing  to  do  wrong ! 

In  these  two  ways,  then,  by  the  furtherance  of  a  Chris- 
tian internationalism  and  the  disarmament  of  the  world, 
can  the  church  make  its  influence  felt  so  as  profoundly  to 
afifect  its  primary  work  of  the  evangelization  of  the  world. 

But  there  are  questions  at  home  which  must  receive  the 
attention  of  the  churches  if  the  nation  is  to  be  an  example 
to  the  world.    To  only  two  of  these  will  I  call  attention. 

Let  us  consider  first  the  condition  of  the  family  in 
America  to-day.  I  am  aware  that  there  are  many  wise 
men  who  will  say  that  any  consideration  of  the  task  of  the 
churches  should  begin  with  the  industrial  problem.  I  am 
not  ignorant  of  its  importance,  but  I  have  thought  it  best 
not  to  deal  with  it  here  because,  among  other  reasons,  it  is 
a  political  question,  and  would  lead  inevitably  to  a  dis- 
cussion of  Socialism,  which,  being  a  theory  of  political 
economy,  has  no  more  place  in  tiis  book  than  has  the 
tariff,  though  the  tariff,  as  well  as  the  industrial  struggle, 


36  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

has  its  ethical  side.  Those  who  feel  the  importance  of  the 
humanizing  of  industry  have,  in  my  opinion,  made  a  mis- 
take in  insisting  that  it  can  be  done  only  by  the  accep- 
tance of  some  particular  method  of  government  or  indus- 
trial management.  It  can  be  done  under  any  form  of  gov- 
ernment and  with  any  organization,  if  the  truth  of  human 
brotherhood  is  borne  in  mind,  and  there  is  where  the  task 
of  the  churches,  in  this  particular,  should  begin  and  end. 

There  are  States  in  which,  it  is  asserted,  the  number  of 
divorces  to  marriages  is  as  high  as  48  per  cent.  This  is  no 
doubt  exceptionally  large;  but  who  that  knows  the  facts  in 
our  social  Ufe  generally  throughout  the  country  can  fail  to 
see  that  there  has  come  an  entirely  new  thought  of  mar- 
riage ?  I  do  not  deny  that  in  some  respects  the  new  is 
better  than  the  old,  nor  would  I  go  to  the  extreme  of  those 
who  would  deny  divorce  in  all  circumstances.  But  can  it 
be  denied  that  many  of  the  divorces  are  preventable,  that 
in  not  a  few  of  the  cases  brought  before  the  courts  there 
are  fraud  and  collusion,  perjured  detectives,  and  many 
other  disgusting  evils  which  are  spread  broadcast  by  the 
press,  and  that,  as  a  result,  the  ideal  of  the  family  is  being 
destroyed  ? 

There  are  many  reasons  which  have  led  to  this  state  of 
affairs,  but  the  underlying  one,  I  think,  is  that  with  the 
increase  in  the  sense  of  individual  value,  there  has  been  no 
corresponding  sense  of  responsibility  to  the  community. 
In  the  Marriage  Service  of  the  Episcopal  Church  there  is  a 
rubric  to  which  attention  is  too  seldom  called:  "Then  .  .  . 
the  Man  shall  give  unto  the  Woman  a  Ring.  And  the 
Minister  taking  the  Ring  shall  deliver  it  unto  the  Man,  to 
put  it  upon  the  fourth  finger  of  the  Woman's  left  hand." 
That  ancient  rubric,  which  seems  to  have  only  an  archaic 
interest,  is,  indeed,  the  witness  to  the  difference  between  a 
civil  and  a  religious  marriage.  In  the  eye  of  the  law  a 
marriage  is  a  contract  between  two  parties,  but  by  the 
church  it  is  conceived  as  a  contract  in  which  three  parties 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES  37 

are  concerned — the  man  and  the  woman  and  humanity. 
The  ideal  humanity  is  represented  by  the  church,  and  the 
church  is  represented  by  the  parson,  or  person  of  the 
church;  the  ring  then  must  pass  through  his  hands,  and  so 
emphasize  the  truth  that  there  is  a  duty  on  the  part  of  the 
married  to  humanity.  When,  then,  one  cries,  "Have  I 
not  a  right  to  develop  my  life  in  the  way  that  seems  to  me 
best?''  the  answer  should  be  that  by  marriage  the  liberty 
of  the  individual  has  been  curtailed.  But  this  is  not  pecu- 
liar to  marriage.  Every  responsibihty  is  a  limitation  of 
liberty.  The  man  or  the  woman  who  has  entered  into  the 
marriage  state  has  thereby  limited  his  or  her  Uberty.  This 
is  one  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  "natural"  religion. 
How  much  greater  is  the  responsibility  of  the  Christian! 
How  is  this  to  be  brought  home  to  the  individual  except 
by  the  united  witness  of  the  church  ?  But  at  present  the 
churches  are  impotent  because,  while  each  has  a  certain 
social  value,  they  are  unable  to  bring  the  united  moral 
judgment  of  Christian  people  to  bear  on  a  particular  case. 
The  woman  who  declares  that  "a  wonderful  thing  has 
come  into  her  life,"  which  wonderful  thing  is  a  lust  for  one 
who  is  not  her  husband,  and  who,  in  consequence,  aban- 
dons husband  and  children,  may  be  condemned  in  one 
church,  but  she  soon  finds  a  home  in  another  and  is  re- 
ceived into  "good  society."  The  truth  is,  these  women 
are  many  of  them  unconscious  that  there  is  anything 
improper  in  their  conduct,  because  the  pressure  of  public 
opinion  has  been  relaxed.  If  the  evil  ended  with  the  fate 
of  the  woman  who  has  done  wrong,  the  danger  might  be 
disregarded.  But  these  women  are  carriers  of  disease. 
Young  girls  talk  of  the  splendid  courage  of  the  woman  who 
has  wrecked  her  home  as  if  she  were  a  Joan  of  Arc,  and 
think  that  she  is  an  example  to  be  followed. 

Not  a  few  earnest  men  beheve  that  a  federal  law  would 
check  the  evil.  This  might,  or  might  not,  be  a  help.  But 
what  a  confession  of  impotence  is  it  on  the  part  of  the 


38  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

churches  to  admit  that  the  one  thing  they  claim  they 
ought  to  be  called  upon  to  administer — ^marriage — they 
are  unable  to  control !  Let  the  ministers  of  all  the  churches 
begin  to  educate  the  young  by  showing  the  spiritual  mean- 
ing of  Christian  marriage — that  it  is  the  sacrament  of  love, 
that  is,  of  self-sacrifice — and  marriage  will  be  approached 
more  in  the  spirit  in  which  it  should  be  approached — "not 
unadvisedly  or  lightly,  but  reverently,  discreetly,  advisedly, 
soberly,  and  in  the  fear  of  God."  It  is  too  often  thought 
of  as  a  social  exhibition.  The  clergy  are  not  infrequently 
asked  to  be  present  at  a  "rehearsal."  If  it  be  thought 
desirable  for  the  bridal  party  to  go  to  the  church  and  note 
where  they  are  to  stand  in  order  that  they  may  not  be 
perplexed  at  the  solemn  moment  of  the  service,  there  can 
be  no  objection,  but  what  shall  we  say  of  a  "rehearsal" 
at  which  the  minister  takes  part,  and,  as  I  have  heard, 
"tries  his  voice"  and  asks  to  be  told  if  he  can  be  dis- 
tinctly heard  when  he  uses  this  or  that  tone,  as  he  thinks 
will  be  most  impressive  ?  The  frivolity  of  ministers  is  not 
without  influence  in  the  popular  opinion  of  marriage,  which 
has  made  it  more  and  more  a  social  function,  and  less  and 
less  a  solemn  dedication  of  two  lives  to  one  another. 

But  more  is  needed  than  instruction  before  marriage 
and  a  reverent  administration  of  the  rite.  The  churches 
must  exercise  their  commission  to  bind  as  well  as  to  loose. 
Let  aU  the  churches  unite  in  an  effort  to  make  effective  the 
moral  judgment  of  Christians,  and  treat  the  man  or  the 
woman — and  too  often  it  is  the  woman — who  has  broken 
up  the  family  and  abandoned  children  and  entered  into  an 
adulterous  connection  as  a  "heathen  and  a  publican,"  and 
it  would  not  be  long  before  there  was  a  change  in  our 
social  standards  and  a  purer  atmosphere  for  our  children 
to  breathe. 

Turn  now  from  the  family  to  the  schools.  Our  fathers 
established  schools  and  colleges  in  this  wilderness  for  the 
formation  of  Christian  character.    Can  it  be  claimed  that 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES  39 

this  is  the  purpose  which  animates  the  school  committees 
and  the  boards  of  education  and  trustees  of  colleges  ?  It 
is  instruction  which  is  the  aim  of  schools  to-day.  But  in- 
struction is  a  means  to  an  end.  If  that  end  be  not  the 
formation  of  character,  what  is  the  end  ?  Education  was 
at  one  time  in  the  hands  of  the  church.  It  is  not  well 
that  it  should  be  left  there  to-day.  But  that  does  not 
mean  that  the  church  has  no  duty  in  the  premises.  The 
Roman  Catholic  Church  feels  that  duty,  and  is  establishing 
parochial  schools  at  great  expense,  in  order  that  the  true 
end  of  education,  as  that  church  conceives  it,  should  be 
attained.  We  do  not  believe  that  Christian  character  is  to 
be  identified  with  the  ideal  of  any  particular  church,  but 
if  we  do  not  believe  that  Christian  character  is  the  pur- 
pose of  education,  what  do  we  believe  ? 

This  is  not  a  Christian  country,  and  it  would  not  be 
right  to  use  the  money  collected  by  taxation  for  the  prop- 
agation of  even  the  Christian  faith  in  the  public  schools. 
But  is  it  impossible  to  have  some  form  of  worship  which 
would  impress  upon  the  thousands  of  children  who  assem- 
ble each  day  in  our  public  schools  that  "in  God  they  live 
and  move  and  have  their  being"  ?  Would  any  appreciable 
number  of  parents  object  to  the  reading  of  a  passage  from 
the  Old  Testament,  one  day  in  the  King  James  version, 
another  in  the  Douai,  and  another  in  the  English  transla- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament  put  forth  by  the  Hebrews? 
Could  we  not  all  recite  the  Lord's  Prayer  ?  Are  there  not 
passages  from  the  New  Testament  wtdch  all  would  gladly 
learn  ?  This,  perhaps,  would  be  all  that  could  be  admitted 
to  the  public  schools  of  the  great  cities,  with  their  heteroge- 
neous population;  but  surely  there  are  numbers  of  Gentile 
communities  in  which  the  children  who  salute  the  flag 
might  also  salute  the  cross.  The  difficulty  which  con- 
fronts us  in  the  public  schools  is  not  absent  from  the  State 
colleges  and  imiversities.  But  many  of  the  greatest  uni- 
versities in  the  land  are  built  on  private,  Christian,  Protes- 


40  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

tant  foundations,  not  a  few  of  them  primarily  for  the  edu- 
cation of  ministers  of  the  gospel.  Is  it  too  much  for  the 
churches  to  ask  that  the  trust  funds  should  be  admin- 
istered with  that  in  mind?  In  some  of  the  universities 
that  is  explicitly  acknowledged.  In  others  it  is  no  doubt 
implicit  and  subconscious.  But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  a 
boy  may  be  matriculated  and  graduated  from  one  of  the 
universities  endowed  by  Christian  piety  and  never  hear 
the  name  of  Jesus  nor  the  story  of  the  church,  unless  he 
seeks  to  hear.  We  forget  that  there  are  thousands  who 
are  as  ignorant  of  Jesus  and  his  church  as  if  they  had  gone 
to  the  University  of  Athens  before  Jesus  was  bom.  There 
are  great  numbers  of  Jewish  youth  in  Christian  colleges 
who  know  no  more  about  Jesus  than  the  average  Protes- 
tant youth  knows  about  Ignatius  Loyola.  What  must  be 
the  impression  made  upon  scholars  from  Japan  and  China 
and  India  who  pass  four  years  in  one  of  the  great  universi- 
ties of  America  and  never  hear  a  word  from  those  in 
authority  which  would  lead  them  to  believe  that  they  are 
Christian  men?  Have  not  the  churches  a  right  to  ask 
that  in  the  entrance  examination  there  should  be  required 
some  knowledge  of  the  Bible — net  as  a  literary  work  of 
art;  that,  perhaps,  has  been  overdone — ^but  as  the  most 
precious  treasury  of  the  spiritual  experience  of  the  world  ? 
Have  they  not  a  right  to  ask  that  there  should  be  some 
knowledge  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  from  those  who  are  entering 
upon  Christian  education?  Have  they  not  a  right — ^is  it 
not  their  duty — to  demand  that  in  the  allocation  of  trust 
funds  for  the  various  departments,  the  chapel  shall  be  con- 
sidered as  important  as  the  law  school  or  the  gymnasium  ? 
We  cannot  afford  to  let  things  drift.  There  are  complaints 
that  paganism  is  invading  all  the  places  of  higher  educa- 
tion, but  we  seem  to  have  forgotten  PauFs  ironic  remark: 
"How  shall  they  believe  if  they  have  not  heard?'* 

The  whole  problem  of  education  is  too  large  and  too 
difficult  to  be  solved  in  any  offhand  way.    But  it  is  a 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  CHURCHES  41 

problem  which  the  churches  should  never  forget  nor  cease 
to  seek  to  solve.  The  fatal  thing  would  be  to  accept  pres- 
ent conditions  as  if  they  were  final  or  inevitable. 

The  evangelization  of  the  world,  the  Christianizing  of 
international  relations,  the  reign  of  peace,  the  purification 
of  the  family,  and  the  upbuilding  of  Christian  character  by 
education  are  the  first  and  most  important  tasks  of  the 
churches  to-day.  These  are  not  all.  There  is  our  political 
life  to  be  purified  and  our  social  life  to  be  refined,  and, 
above  all,  our  industrial  life  to  be  humanized.  With  the 
exception  of  foreign  missions  and  Christian  education,  most 
serious-minded  men  will  agree  that  these  are  the  things 
which  must  be  done.  All  Christians  will  agree  that  all 
these  things  must  be  done,  but  some  of  them  may  be  in- 
clined to  say  that  the  outlook  is  not  so  threatening  as  it 
has  been  represented  here  to  be,  and  others  that  even  if  it 
be,  it  is  not  the  task  of  the  churches  but  of  humanity  itself. 
Of  the  latter  aspect  of  the  subject,  I  shall  have  something 
to  say  later;  for  the  moment  let  it  be  held  in  abeyance. 
But  that  the  time  is  short  in  which  the  task  must  at  least 
be  begun,  I  firmly  believe. 

"Except  that  the  Lord  had  shortened  those  days,  no 
flesh  should  be  saved:  but  for  the  elect's  sake  whom  He 
hath  chosen,  he  hath  shortened  the  days."  *  How  the  sol- 
emn words,  which  perhaps  meant  little  to  us  in  the  past, 
now  flame  out  with  dreadful  significance,  as  did  the  hand- 
writing on  the  wall,  foretelling  the  fall  of  one  of  the  great 
empires  of  the  world!  The  prophet  said:  "Thou  art 
weighed  in  the  balance  and  found  wanting."  What  is  true 
of  the  nations  is  true  of  the  churches.  It  is  the  vice  of 
chauvinism  in  the  churches — though  we  call  it  sectarianism 
— ^which  is  the  cause  for  their  weakness  in  this  crisis  of  the 
world  and  of  the  churches.  How,  then,  can  they  cure  the 
evil  from  which  they  themselves  suffer  ?  "Physician,  heal 
thyself,"  may  well  be  said  to  each  of  them.  Can  any  one 
*  Mark  13  :  20, 


42  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

of  the  Protestant  churches  claim  that  it  is  equal  to  the 
stupendous  task  ?  Is  any  one  of  them  alone  able  to  change 
hirnian  nature?  We  have  only  to  look  at  the  conditions 
of  the  churches  to-day  to  see  how  impossible  it  is  for  the 
miracle  to  be  worked  without  repentance;  that  is,  a  change 
of  mind  on  the  part  of  Christian  men  in  regard  to  the 
church,  its  mission  and  its  task. 

The  time  has  been  shortened  for  the  elect's  sake;  not 
that  the  elect  may  continue  to  live  as  they  have  done  in 
the  past,  "at  ease  in  Sion,"  but  that  through  the  elect  the 
way  of  God  may  be  made  known  among  men,  not  only 
spacially  in  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth,  but  also 
spiritually  in  every  relation  of  Hfe.  Has  not  the  parable  of 
Jonah  a  message  to  the  modern  church  ? 


CHAPTER  IV 
SECTARIANISM 

A.    Protestant 

The  word  "churches"  is  used  here  as  it  is  used  in  the 
Preface  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  to  designate  "the 
different  religious  denominations  in  these  States."  It  does 
not  include  the  Eastern  nor  the  Roman  Catholic  churches. 
Therefore,  when  "sectarianism"  is  spoken  of  it  is  the  sec- 
tarianism of  the  various  religious  denominations  in  this 
land  that  we  are  to  have  in  mind.  Whether  sectarianism 
is  confined  to  the  Protestant  churches  is  a  question  to  be 
touched  on  later.  At  present  I  would  call  attention  to  the 
ecclesiastical  condition  in  the  towns  and  cities  of  the  land, 
for  in  that  way,  I  think,  we  can  best  discover  the  nature 
of  sectarianism  and  its  effects.  I  say  "ecclesiastical" 
rather  than  "religious,"  because  the  two  are  not  conter- 
minous. 

Even  those  of  us  whose  homes  are  in  one  of  the  great 
cities  have  some  acquaintance  with  coimtry  life.  What, 
then,  let  us  ask,  is  the  condition  of  the  churches  in  the 
average  village  in  this  country  ?  I  have  one  in  mind  which 
I  have  been  led  to  believe  from  the  testimony  of  many  men 
is  typical  of  most  of  the  small  towns.  I  do  not  know  the 
exact  population  of  the  village  of  which  I  am  now  speak- 
ing, but  I  doubt  if  it  has  more  than  a  thousand  inhabi- 
tants. The  old  white  meeting-house,  "set  upon  a  hill," 
was  once  the  religious  home  of  the  entire  conamunity.  But 
the  youth  has  drifted  to  the  cities  or  trekked  to  the  West, 
and  those  who  are  left  have  lost  the  early  vigor  which  once 
made  the  village  an  important  factor  in  the  life  of  the 
State.    The  newcomers  have  never  felt  the  tradition  of  the 

43 


44  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

past,  and  the  tone  of  the  community  is  no  longer  what  it 
once  was.  There  is  more  comfort  in  the  houses  and  more 
wealth  in  the  community,  but  the  ideals  have  changed,  or, 
rather,  the  old  ideals  have  passed  away,  and  there  have 
been  none  that  can  be  called  "ideals"  to  take  their  place. 

There  are  now  one  Roman  Catholic  and  four  Protestant 
churches  in  that  town.  No  one  of  them,  except  the  Roman 
CathoUc,  had  more  than  fifty  worshippers  on  any  Sunday 
morning  when  I  was  present — though  two  of  the  Protes- 
tant churches,  at  least,  could  have  seated  the  whole  church- 
going  population.  But  it  was  not  the  smallness  but  the 
character  of  the  congregation  which  made  a  distressing  im- 
pression. Most  of  them  were  old  people,  there  were  a  few 
children — and  I  pitied  them !  The  young,  vigorous  life  of 
the  community  was  absent.  Some  had  gone  fishing,  some 
were  saiHng,  some  were  playing  golf,  and  not  a  few  simply 
loafed.  I  do  not  express  any  opinion  on  the  religious  life 
of  the  absentees;  I  am  only  calling  attention  to  the  condi- 
tion of  the  churches. 

Each  minister,  I  soon  learned,  was  living  on  a  pittance  a 
choreman  would  have  scorned,  and  could  with  difficulty 
pay  his  weekly  bills.  One  was  not  a  "settled"  minister, 
but  was  "hired";  coming  from  a  near-by  town  on  Satur- 
day evening  and  returning  Monday  morning.  One  of  the 
deacons  called  my  attention  to  the  economic  advantage  of 
this  arrangement.  I  asked  one  of  my  acquaintances,  a 
substantial  man  in  the  community,  to  which  of  the  churches 
he  went?  He  replied:  "To  none  of  them.  I  subscribe  to 
each  of  them,  for  the  only  way  they  can  live  is  by  having 
oyster-suppers  in  the  winter  and  a  strawberry  festival  in 
summer,  to  which  every  one  is  expected  to  go,  no  matter 
to  which  church  he  belongs.  The  only  one  that  amounts 
to  a  row  of  pins  is  the  Catholic  church." 

Yet  this  is  in  the  heart  of  New  England !  We  need  not 
accept  my  friend's  judgment  as  final.  No  doubt  every  one 
of  those  churches  is  doing  some  good.    There  are  old  peo- 


SECTARIANISM  45 

pie  who  have  the  remembrance  of  early  teaching  kept  alive 
in  their  hearts;  there  are  those  in  sorrow  who  are  being 
comforted,  and,  let  us  hope,  some  who  are  receiving  in- 
spiration to  lead  a  godly  life.  But  when  all  has  been  said 
that  can  be  said  in  favor  of  these  churches,  is  it  not  true 
that  they  are  rather  of  the  nature  of  convalescent  homes 
than  vigorous  agencies  for  the  evangelization  of  the  world 
and  upbuilding  of  strong  Christian  character  ? 

In  the  larger  towns  things  are  apparently  somewhat  bet- 
ter. But  the  '  ixiovies"  and  now  Sunday  baseball  are  mak- 
ing the  problem  of  church  attendance  more  and  more  diffi- 
cult. Those  who  consider  the  effect  of  habitual  "assem- 
bling of  ourselves  together"  cannot  but  feel  apprehensive 
of  the  future  in  which  the  yoimg  will  have  grown  up  with- 
out the  influence  which  they  feel  has  been  most  potent  in 
their  own  lives. 

Not  a  few  of  the  younger  generation  who  still  attend 
church,  because  their  parents  wish  them  to  do  so,  are  ask- 
ing for  a  reason  for  the  continuance  of  a  custom  which 
seems  to  have  no  meaning  to  them.  They  are  willing  to 
admit  that  in  the  past  the  church  has  been  a  vital  factor 
in  life,  but  they  question  if  there  is  the  same  need  for  it 
to-day  as  there  was  in  the  days  when  books  were  few  and 
there  was  no  other  means  of  enlightenment.  But  when 
they  are  asked  to  suggest  some  other  means  of  instructing 
and  inspiring  people,  they  have  to  admit  that  they  do  not 
know  of  any.  They  would  retain  the  ethics  and  the  ideals 
of  Jesus,  but  they  are  sceptical  of  the  institution  which 
claims  to  be  the  exclusive  means  of  keeping  these  alive. 
And  yet,  who  does  not  know  that  the  pressure  of  Kfe  is  so 
strong  that  if  there  be  not  some  day  set  apart  for  the 
remembrance  of  those  truths  and  ideals,  they  are  in  danger 
of  evaporating?  The  church  is  needed,  but  not  neces- 
sarily the  kind  of  church  which  sufficed  in  the  days  of  old. 
Such  churches  as  are  found  in  many  of  the  villages  and 
towns  have  not  the  respect  of  the  community,  and  cannot 


46  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

speak  with  authority  on  the  vital  questions  that  men  are 
asking  to-day.  They  therefore  cannot  be  called  the  moral 
guides  of  the  people.  Yet,  that  guidance  is  needed,  who 
can  doubt?  "The  Great  White  Way''  of  the  large  cities 
may  be  more  dramatic  in  its  wickedness  than  the  sin  of 
the  small  town,  but  the  small  towns  are  sometimes  morally 
corrupt.  Many  of  the  degenerates  found  in  the  streets  of 
the  cities  fell  from  grace  in  the  small  country  town.  Often 
the  social  life  is  drab  and  dispiriting.  I  am  told  that  the 
vices  of  the  rich  fools  who  come  into  the  country  during 
the  summer  months  are  imitated  by  the  youth  when  the 
visitors  have  gone.  The  day  was  when  the  cities  were  fed 
by  the  youth  from  the  country,  but  now  the  country  is 
becoming  more  and  more  dependent  upon  the  city.  The 
country  town  has  lost  its  initiative.  It  was  the  country 
church  which  gave  vitality  to  the  village,  and  nothing  but 
the  church  will  restore  it.  But  the  power  to  effect  such 
a  reformation  does  not  seem  to  licrin  the  churches  as  they 
are  to-day. 

When  we  turn  to  the  great  cities,  the  churches  seem  to 
be  more  alive.  There  is  better  music;  the  congregations 
are  larger,  and  there  is  apparently  more  life.  But  there 
are  few  churches  in  the  cities  which  are  not  larger  than 
they  need  be  for  the  congregations  which  worship  in  them 
— and  there  is  another  church,  a  block  away,  in  the  same 
condition.  Each  of  these  churches  is  a  costly  affair,  and 
as  a  result  of  competition  there  is  arising  a  problem  which 
cannot  fail  to  affect  the  life  of  the  church  at  large,  and 
that  is  the  ever-increasing  cost  of  church  attendance.  It 
is  true  that  there  are  more  so-called  "free"  churches  than 
there  were  formerly,  but  many  agree  that  they  are  not  so 
weU  adapted  to  "family"  worship  as  were  the  old  "pew" 
churches.  Not  a  few  young  married  people  who  would  be 
glad  to  attend  church  in  the  cities  find  themselves  embar- 
rassed to  meet  the  constant  demands  which  the  minister 
must  make  in  order  to  keep  in  good  standing  in  his  denomi- 


SECTARIANISM  47 

nation.  Many  young  married  people  send  their  children 
to  Sunday-school,  but  they  themselves  have  no  regular 
place  of  worship,  and  say  frankly  that  they  cannot  afford 
to  have  one.  Possibly  some  serious  students  of  the  Ref- 
ormation have  been  amused  by  Mr.  Brooks  Adams's  dog- 
matic dictum  that  the  early  success  of  Protestantism  was 
due  to  economic  causes — ^it  was  found  to  be  a  cheaper  form 
of  religion !  But  there  .aay  be  more  in  the  suggestion  than 
we  care  to  admit;  and  it  may  come  to  pass,  in  our  day, 
that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  will  underwrite  eternal 
life-insurance  policies  at  a  rate  which  will  put  Protestant 
companies  out  of  business,  unless  we  reduce  our  excessive 
assessments. 

At  any  rate,  it  is  the  economic  waste  in  the  churches 
which  has  attracted  the  attention  of  some  of  those  good 
men  who,  knowing  that  the  elimination  of  waste  has  been 
the  source  of  wealth  in  business,  are  shocked  by  the  ex- 
travagance which  is  so  characteristic  of  the  churches. 
"Why,"  say  these  men,  "cannot  the  churches  'get  to- 
gether' and  pool  their  assets  and  liabilities.'*"  This  is  a 
natural  question  from  men  who  have  seen  the  great  advan- 
tage which,  in  spite  of  evident  lawlessness  in  the  past  on 
the  part  of  some  organizations,  has  revolutionized  our  in- 
dustrial life.  But  great  as  would  be  the  advantage  of 
some  readjustment  of  our  ecclesiastical  affairs,  the  Ameri- 
can people  are  not  going  to  enter  any  religious  "trust." 
They  have  lost  too  much  individual  initiative  in  the  eco- 
nomic and  political  life  to  abandon  what  is  left  in  the  eccle- 
siastical. No  doubt  economy  is  a  desirable  thing  and  pre- 
ventable waste  should,  if  possible,  be  checked;  but  those 
who  think  that  economy  alone  will  be  the  deciding  factor 
in  the  life  of  the  churches  have  forgotten  how  idealistic 
Americans  are,  and  that  no  matter  what  the  price,  they 
will  have  what  they  want.  Many  are  convinced  that  their 
church  stands  for  some  principle  which  is  essential  to  the 
well-being  of  the  body  of  Christ.    Each  believes  this  of  the 


48  THE   CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

church  to  which  he  belongs,  but  finds  it  hard  to  beheve  the 
same  of  any  other.  There  is  where  sectarianism  lurks. 
Sectarianism  is  not  separation  into  different  groups  to  keep 
alive  a  vital  truth  which  seems  to  have  been  forgotten  by 
others,  or  to  worship  God  in  a  way  which  is  congenial  to 
those  who  gather  together;  it  is  the  spirit  which  denies 
that  each  of  these  groups  is  bearing  witness  to  a  forgotten 
or  unacknowledged  truth  which  the  whole  body  must  re- 
ceive before  the  work  of  the  particular  group  will  have 
been  finished.  The  Puritan  spirit  which  has  permeated  all 
the  churches  finds  its  charter  in  the  inspired  hymn  of 
Simeon:  "We  being  delivered  out  of  the  hand  of  our  ene- 
mies, may  serve  Him  without  fear.*' 

It  is  iJie  recognition  of  this  truth  which  must  be  the 
first  step  taken  by  Christian  people  before  there  can  be 
any  effective  unity.  When  that  step  has  been  taken,  I 
believe  that  it  will  be  found  that  some  of  the  churches 
have  finished  their  work  and  might  well  be  consolidated 
with  some  one  of  the  others.  How  it  is  to  be  decided 
which  of  these  churches  shall  give  up  its  separate  exist- 
ence is  a  question  to  be  dealt  with  later.  For  the  present 
it  is  only  necessary  to  say  that  it  will  be  that  church  whose 
truth  has  been  received  by  the  other  churches.  What 
should  be  insisted  upon  at  the  moment  is  only  that  the 
churches  are  called  upon  to  face  the  facts  of  life,  and  that 
one  of  these  facts  is  that  the  Protestant  churches  are  losing 
influence. 

I  have  talked  on  this  subject  with  serious-minded  people 
who,  though  they  lament  it,  are  convinced  that  the  future 
religious  life  of  this  country  will  be  found  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  because  they  think  that  it  is  the  only 
church  which  is  not  a  sect.  I  do  not  believe  they  are  right, 
but  I  do  think  that  we  are*  not  justified  in  dismissing  the 
suggestion  as  if  there  were  no  danger  to  Protestantism,  or 
as  if  it  were  not  true  that  the  source  of  that  danger  is  the 
deadly  sin  of  schism. 


SECTARIANISM  49 

If  we  look  to  the  country  districts,  which  were  once  the 
strongholds  of  Protestantism,  we  may  be  surprised  to  find 
the  gains  which  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  has  made  in 
recent  years.  It  is  commonly  supposed  that  this  is  due 
entirely  to  immigration.  But  that  is  a  mistake.  I  have  in 
mind  one  New  England  township,  where  twenty  years  ago 
there  were  seven  Baptist  churchei.  It  is  a  scattered  com- 
mimity,  and  as  there  are  but  two  "settlements,"  probably 
two  churches  were  needed.  But  seven !  And  those  varie- 
ties of  one  particular  church!  With  the  arrival  of  the 
summer  visitors  in  that  commimity,  there  arose  a  demand, 
first  for  an  Episcopal  church,  to  enable  the  people  in  the 
"cottages"  to  have  the  service  with  which  they  were 
familiar,  and  which  their  children  could  follow;  then  came 
a  demand  for  a  Roman  Catholic  church,  to  minister  to 
the  Irish  and  French  servants  and  the  "help"  at  the  hotel, 
and  possibly  to  one  or  two  Catholic  families  among  the 
"cottage"  folk.  The  money  needed  was  soon  subscribed 
— almost  entirely  by  Protestants.  A  C5niic  may  suggest 
that  this  was  due  less  to  care  for  the  religious  welfare  of 
the  servants  than  to  the  knowledge  that  if  there  were  no 
Catholic  church  there  would  soon  be  no  servants;  but  I 
believe  that  a  more  generous  and  truer  statement  would 
be  that  this  money  was  largely  given  by  those  who  felt 
that  members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  faith  had  a  right  to 
the  ministration  of  the  rites  and  sacraments  of  their  church 
even  though  they  were  too  poor  to  pay  for  them — and  that, 
therefore,  the  money  of  Protestants  was  given.  It  waa 
supposed  that  the  Catholic  church  would  be  closed  dur- 
ing the  winter  months,  as  are  the  Episcopal  church  and 
the  hotel.  But  so  far  from  that,  four  of  the  Baptist 
churches  have  been  closed,  and  the  Catholic  church  is 
ministering  to  a  congregation  smaller,  it  is  true,  in  the 
winter  than  in  the  summer,  but  still  larger  than  can  be 
found  in  any  of  the  Protestant  churches  in  that  commu- 
nity.   How  has  that  come  about?    By  the  conversion  of 


so  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  "natives"?  Not  of  one,  so  far  as  I  know.  But  not 
a  few  nice  Irish  and  French  girls,  who  came  as  waitresses 
and  maids,  married  the  young  men  of  the  village,  and,  of 
course,  their  children — of  those  there  are  not  a  few — are 
being  brought  up  in  the  faith  of  the  mother,  partly  because 
the  father  had  no  faith  of  any  sort.  I  do  not  think  we 
ought  to  begrudge  the  smile  with  which  I  suspect  the  good 
priest  who  built  that  church  with  Protestant  money  made 
his  report  to  his  bishop.  Now  the  same  thing  is  going  on 
in  every  part  of  the  country. 

When  we  turn  to  the  large  cities  we  find  that  hundreds 
of  children  of  Protestant  parents  are  taken  charge  of  by 
Roman  Catholic  orphan  asylums  and  foundling  hospitals; 
some  are  receiving  them  from  the  courts  because  the  chil- 
dren are  left  without  a  natural  protector.  These  are  but 
rivulets,  it  is  true,  but  when  we  add  to  those  the  large 
influx  of  immigrants,  we  cannot  fail  to  be  impressed  by  the 
rapid  growth  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Well,  he  whom  Gib- 
bon liked  to  refer  to  as  the  "philosopher"  may  ask:  "Is 
this  a  thing  to  regret?  If  Protestantism  has  failed  to 
appeal  to  iJie  people  and  hold  them  in  allegiance,  why 
should  it  be  thought  a  misfortune  that  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  which  started  the  race  in  this  country  so  heavily 
handicapped,  should  now  win  the  prize  ?  Is  it  not  due  to 
the  self-denying  activity  of  priests  and  people  ?  Is  it  not 
due  to  the  fact  that  she  has  spoken  with  no  uncertain 
sound?  If  Protestantism  has  failed,  would  you  rather 
have  this  country  become  Catholic  or  pagan  ?"  Of  course 
there  can  be  but  one  answer  to  that  question  which  a 
religious  man  could  give.  The  celebrated  and  eloquent 
Father  Vaughan  is  reported  to  have  said  in  Montreal  in 
1910  that  Catholics  will  control  the  United  States.  "From 
what  I  hear  of  conditions  in  the  United  States,  the  Catho- 
lics will  soon  control  that  country  through  force  of  num- 
bers. Christian  fecundity  is  fighting  sterile  paganism,  and 
the  battle  for  the  possession  of  the  world  will  soon  be  nar- 


SECTARIANISM  51 

rowed  to  the  Catholic  Church  and  the  destructive  forces  of 
agnosticism.     Protestantism  is  disappearing." 

We  do  not  believe  that  Protestantism  is  disappearing. 
But  it  is  certainly  true  that  if  it  should  disappear  or  lose 
its  power,  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  wou^«-  triumph 
over  paganism.  If  indeed  that  is  the  alternative,  I  do  not 
think  we  should  delay  to  return  to  the  bosom  of  the  mother 
church  from  which  we  have  wandered.  But  before  tak- 
ing that  desperate  step — which  a  few  take  every  year, 
but  which  the  American  people  in  general  have  as  yet 
shown  no  intention  of  taking — ^it  might  be  well  for  us  seri- 
ously ^to  consider  just  what  this  would  mean.  And  in  so 
doing,  I  hope  it  will  be  believed  that  I  am  far  from  wishing 
to  stir  up  religious  hatred  or  to  belittle  the  many  services 
to  the  cause  of  true  religion  which  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  has  rendered  in  this  land.  We  owe  a  great  debt 
to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Were  it  to  withdraw 
from  the  great  cities,  crime  would  increase  by  geometrical 
progression.  It  is  the  religious  arm  of  the  police.  It 
stands  for  law  and  order  in  the  community.  There  are 
self-denying  priests  in  that  communion  who  put  to  shame 
the  self-indulgence  of  some  of  our  Protestant  ministers; 
there  are  saintly  nuns  and  Sisters  of  Charity  who  are  fol- 
lowing in  the  footsteps  of  our  Saviour;  there  are  multitudes 
of  earnest  and  devout  communicants  who  are  living  beau- 
tiful lives,  understanding  little,  it  may  be,  of  the  dogmas 
of  the  church,  but  content  to  leave  them  to  those  who, 
they  have  been  taught  to  believe,  do  know.  It  seems  to 
them  no  more  necessary  for  the  laity  to  know  what  the 
priest  is  administering  than  it  is  for  the  patient  in  the  hos- 
pital to  know  what  the  Latin  prescription  of  the  doctor 
means.  Both  are  doing  good  and  they  trust  them.  All 
this  we  should  rejoice  in,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  we 
should  imitate  their  example  and  place  our  souls  in  the 
keeping  of  the  priest. 

But  we  cannot  afford  to  drift.    We  must  look  facts  in 


52  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  face  and  act.  What  would  happen  if  the  Protestant 
conception  of  religion  were  to  perish  from  the  earth  ?  Sup- 
pose the  whole  nation  were  given  over  to  secularism, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  disintegration  of  manners, 
which  all  refined  people  regret,  would  be  followed  by  a  dis- 
integration of  morals.  But  if  that  were  to  follow,  then 
would  come  the  dreadful  famine  foretold  by  the  prophet: 
**Not  a  famine  for  bread  nor  a  thirst  for  water,  but  of  hear- 
ing the  words  of  the  Lord."  *  What  would  be  the  next 
step?  Man  is  "incurably  religious,"  and  if  our  children 
lose  the  religion  which  they  have  inherited  they  will  have 
to  have  some  religion.  What  will  that  be  ?  There  can  be 
no  such  thing  as  a  "new"  religion.  Whatever  it  may  be 
called,  it  will  have  its  roots  in  some  religion  which  has 
been  found  helpful  in  the  past.  But  our  whole  Western 
civilization  is  built  upon  the  religion  of  Jesus.  Some  form 
of  that  will  be  the  only  possible  one.  But  if  Protestantism 
be  discarded,  the  only  form  left  will  be  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic. If  we  take  history  as  our  guide,  we  may  forecast  the 
future  with  a  certain  confidence.  We  know  what  hap- 
pened after  the  Reformation.  At  first  it  looked  as  if  all 
Europe  would  adopt  the  Reformed  religion,  but  in  less 
than  a  hundred  years  that  made  no  further  conquests  and 
lost  much  that  it  had  gained.  We  know  how  the  "  Counter- 
Reformation"  came  about — first,  by  a  reformation  in  the 
morals  of  the  Catholic  clergy,  which  was  largely  due  to  the 
influence  of  Protestantism,  and,  secondly,  through  the  or- 
ganization of  the  company  of  Jesuits,  who  through  the 
education  of  children  and  the  secret  power  of  the  confes- 
sional insinuated  themselves  into  the  secret  life  of  the 
conmiunity.  It  may  be  said:  "This  is  ancient  history." 
Well,  there  is  a  modem  instance  which  is  even  more  in- 
structive. In  the  last  twenty  years  the  increase  in  the 
membership  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Germany 
has  been  great.    In  the  very  lands  where  Luther  preached, 

*  Amos  8  ;  2. 


SECTARIANISM  53 

thousands  of  Protestants,  in  the  last  twenty  years,  have 
returned  to  the  Roman  Catholic  fold.  Why?  Because, 
though  they  clung  to  the  Protestant  doctrine  of  individual 
freedom,  they  had  lost  the  corresponding  sense  of  ,.  ersonal 
responsibility,  and  when  they  lost  that  sense  of  personal 
responsibiHty  and  turned  the  church  over  to  the  state,  the 
state  gave  them  in  return  just  what  it  thought  was  bene- 
ficial to  them  as  members  of  the  state.  But  the  soul  of 
man  cried  out  for  the  Hving  God;  Protestantism  was  un- 
able to  supply  the  religious  need  of  the  people,  and  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  came  in  and  supplied  it. 

Is  that  to  be  the  history  of  this  country  in  the  next 
century  ?    It  is  quite  within  the  bounds  of  possibility. 


CHAPTER  V 
SECTARIANISM 

B,    Catholic 

In  the  preceding  chapter  an  attempt  was  made  to  ana- 
lyze the  meaning  of  sectarianism  as  it  appears  in  the  Prot- 
estant churches.  We  believe  that  the  increase  in  the 
power  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  American  life  is 
largely  due  to  the  weakness  of  the  Protestant  churches, 
and  that  unless  that  weakness  can  be  overcome  by  some 
genuine  religious  co-operation  among  the  Protestant 
churches — the  result  of  true  spiritual  unity — the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  may  dominate  the  religious  life  of  this 
country.  This  danger  not  a  few  men  foresee.  Some  be- 
lieve that  it  can  be  prevented  by  the  denunciation  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  on  the  part  of  Protestant  bigots; 
others,  that  what  is  needed  is  a  political  party  boimd  to- 
gether by  a  secret  understanding  that  no  Catholic  shall  be 
elected  to  public  office.  Indeed,  it  is  an  open  secret  that 
in  certain  of  the  States  where  the  Protestant  feeling  is 
strong,  no  man  can  be  elected  to  public  office  who  is  not 
approved  by  one  of  the  strong  Protestant  churches,  just 
as  in  other  States  it  is  almost  impossible  for  a  man  to  at- 
tain certain  offices  without  the  approval  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church. 

The  spirit  of  Christ  should  prevent  this;  no  de- 
nunciation of  a  church  which,  when  its  shortcomings  and 
faults  have  been  admitted,  is  trying  to  bring  people  to  the 
discipleship  of  Christ  can  be  justified.  It  will  only  serve 
to  consolidate  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  prevent 
the  many  people  in  it  who  are  dissatisfied  with  the  autoc- 
racy of  the  priests  from  asserting  their  innate  American 

54 


SECTARIANISM  55 

independence.  While  it  is  true  that  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  claims  something  like  16,000,000  members,  what 
would  not  its  membership  be  had  it  been  able  to  retain 
the  children  to  the  third  and  fourth  generations  ?  ?  re  dis- 
integration in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  as  a  result  of 
breathing  the  American  atmosphere  of  independence  is  as 
notable  a  sign  of  the  times  as  is  the  increase  in  its  mem- 
bership by  inmiigration  and  what  Father  Vaughan  calls 
"Christian  fecundity."  But  alas,  these  Catholics  who 
have  lapsed  are  of  small  value  to  the  community.  A  few 
(perhaps  more  than  is  generally  known)  enter  each  year 
into  the  communion  of  one  of  the  Protestant  churches,  but 
most  of  them  revert  to  paganism  and  not  a  few  of  them 
take  to  crime.  A  more  conciliatory  spirit  and  a  juster  ap- 
preciation of  the  merits  and  value  of  the  Catholic  Church 
might  be  the  means  of  saving  many  of  them  from  such  a 
fate. 

The  history  of  this  country  ought  to  show  us  the  futil- 
ity of  political  organizations  on  a  racial  or  sectarian  basis. 
If  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  not  to  become  the  domi- 
nant religious  influence  in  this  country,  it  can  only  be  by 
the  manifestation  of  such  inspiring  religious  Hfe  in  the 
Protestant  brotherhood  as  will  appeal  to  the  imagination 
and  win  the  allegiance  of  earnest  religious  men. 

With  these  thoughts  in  mind,  let  us  turn  now  to  a 
consideration  of  the  sectarian  spirit  as  it  appears  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  as  it  is  known  to  most  of 
us,  and  justly  honored  for  its  devout  spirit,  is  the  church 
as  revealed  in  the  lives  of  those  who  have  been  trained  by 
it  in  England  and  Ireland  and  in  the  United  States — that 
is,  in  countries  where  the  influence  of  Protestantism  is 
strong.  What  it  is  outside  that  influence  we  may  see  in 
Central  and  South  America,  in  Spain  and  in  Italy  before 
the  overthrow  of  the  temporal  power  of  the  pope.  If  the 
knowledge  of  God  and  of  Jesus  which  has  come  to  us 


$6  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

through  the  preaching  of  the  word  of  God  in  the  Protes- 
tant churches  were  to  be  lost,  then  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  would  revert  to  its  mediaeval  form,  and  the  hands 
of  the  clock  of  time  would  be  turned  back  and  the  work  of 
the  Reformation  would  have  to  be  done  anew.  Let  any 
man  whose  imagination  is  equal  to  the  task  picture  to 
himself  what  the  religious  life  of  this  nation  would  be 
dominated  by  the  mediaeval  church.  The  secrets  of  the 
family  would  be  poured  into  the  ears  of  the  priest;  the 
minds  of  the  young  poisoned  by  the  suggestion  of  evil 
through  the  confessional;  every  department  of  Hfe  under 
the  direction  of  the  priest;  and  the  ^'mind,"  of  which  we  are 
so  proud,  told  that  it  has  nothing  to  do  but  to  obey.  The 
people  would  be  kept  in  a  state  of  perpetual  pupilage,  and 
when  that  had  been  attained  there  would  follow  the  polit- 
ical supervision  of  the  life  of  the  nation,  as  is  the  case  in 
Quebec  to-day.  Again  I  say  that  this  may  seem  fantastic, 
but  consider  what  the  state  of  the  case  is  to-day  wherever 
Protestantism  has  not  to  be  reckoned  with. 

This  republic  was  founded  by  religious  people  and  on 
a  religious  basis.  The  very  spirit  of  that  religion  was  the 
freedom  of  the  individual  and  a  deep  and  awful  sense  of 
personal  responsibiUty.  Now  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
has  an  entirely  different  theory  of  the  religious  life.  There 
are  three  ways  in  which,  as  a  political  organization,  it  is 
showing  its  influence  in  the  life  of  the  country.  In  the 
first  place,  the  education  of  the  youth  of  the  land  was  the 
first  care  of  the  fathers  of  this  country,  and  the  establish- 
ment of  the  public  schools  has  been  the  one  means  that  we 
have  had  for  preventing  the  severing  of  the  people  into 
classes  and  for  making  a  true  democracy.  That  those 
schools  are  open  to  criticism  no  serious-minded  person  can 
doubt,  but  with  all  their  faults  they  are  the  one  great 
democratic  influence  in  this  land,  and  would  by  the  priests 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  be  put  out  of  existence  in 
favor  of  the  parochial  schools.    Efforts  have  been  made  in 


SECTARIANISM  57 

some  of  the  States  to  divide  the  taxes  for  education  pro 
rata  among  the  different  churches.  The  public  schools 
are  spoken  of  as  *' godless."  Who  does  not  know  thi  t  it 
is  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  which  prevents  any  re- 
Kgious  teaching  not  supervised  by  its  priests  in  the  schools  ? 

In  the  second  place,  the  great  problem  of  this  country 
for  many  years — and  it  is  going  to  be  greater  in  the  years 
to  come — ^has  been  immigration.  In  the  beginning  it  was 
so  necessary  to  have  large  immigration  for  the  economic 
needs  of  the  country  that  we  paid  little  attention  to  either 
the  intellectual  or  moral  condition  of  those  who  came  in. 
Now  in  order  that  those  people  may  be  assimilated  and 
made  a  part  of  the  country,  the  English  language,  spoken 
and  written,  is  of  chief  importance.  But  the  archbishop  of 
St.  Louis,*  calling  attention  to  this  vast  immigration,  which, 
as  he  says,  is  largely  Roman  Catholic  and  is  destined  to  be 
still  more  so  in  days  to  come,  insists  that  these  people 
should  be  kept  in  the  racial  atmosphere  in  which  they  have 
heretofore  lived  and  encouraged  to  speak  their  own  lan- 
guage; in  other  words,  he  would  perpetuate  in  this  country 
all  those  racial  differences  which  have  made  Europe  what 
it  is  to-day.  The  result — ^it  is  not  asserted  that  this  is  the 
purpose — but  the  result  would  be  that  all  over  this  coun- 
try there  would  be  communities  of  people  absolutely  un- 
der the  direction  of  the  priests,  as  are  the  people  of  the 
province  of  Quebec.  But  that  would  have  a.  repercussion 
in  Europe.  We  have  seen  in  the  last  few  years  an  attempt 
made  to  stir  up  ill  will  between  this  country  and  England 
over  the  Irish  question.  That  Ireland  has  not  in  the  past 
had  a  "fair  deal"  from  England  a  large  number  of  Ameri- 
cans are  convinced.  But  when  it  was  seen  that  this  was 
to  be  made  a  casus  belli,  the  sympathies  of  America  were 
chilled.  It  was  seen  that  the  priests  of  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church,  most  of  whom  are  of  Irish  blood,  were  using 
their  influence  to  prevent  the  co-operation  of  England  and 

*  "Rome's  Idea  of  Americanization,"  The  Torch,  Feb.  15,  1921. 


S8  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  United  States;  when  we  were  told  that  it  had  been 
England's  purpose  for  centuries  to  substitute  Protestant- 
ism for  Catholicism  in  Ireland,  men  began  to  ask  them- 
selves if  there  were  not  more  than  a  desire  to  revenge  an 
ancient  wrong  in  this  agitation.  It  is  a  significant  fact 
that  England  is  the  only  important  country  in  Europe  in 
which  an  established  church  is  still  tolerated.  In  every 
other  country  of  importance  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
has  been  disestablished  because  it  was  found  to  be  the  en- 
emy of  democracy,  while  in  Protestant  England  the  church 
is  still  a  power  in  the  Hfe  of  the  nation.  If,  then,  these  two 
great  Protestant  countries — England  and  America — could 
be  divided,  the  political  ideals  which  they  hold  in  common 
might  be  made  ineffective  and  in  that  way  the  triumph  of 
a  discredited  political  theory  of  the  domination  of  the 
state  by  the  Vatican  might  be  enabled  to  gain  some  of  the 
ground  which  it  had  lost.  But  as  long  as  the  English- 
speaking  peoples  can  act  together,  there  will  be  a  continu- 
ous progress  in  those  ideals  which  are  the  essence  of  Prot- 
estantism, viz.,  spiritual  freedom  accompanied  by  a  deep 
sense  of  personal  responsibility.  If  then  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church,  which  has  made  the  wrongs  of  Ireland  a  cause 
for  stirring  up  bad  blood  between  England  and  the  United 
States,  were  able  to  capitalize  all  the  causes  of  discontent 
among  the  peoples  who  have  come  to  this  country  from 
Europe,  the  problem  of  Americanization  would  be  greatly 
confused.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  if  the  Roman 
Catholic  had  dominion  in  this  country,  the  republic  of 
Adams,  Hamilton,  and  Jefferson  would  fail. 

We  have  no  right  to  find  fault  with  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  for  its  theory  of  political  Ufe;  it  is  to  be  assumed 
that  the  priests  are  convinced  that  unless  the  country  is 
dominated  by  the  church,  the  morality  of  the  people  is 
endangered;  but  we  are  justified  in  saying  that  it  is  un- 
American.  Its  success  depends  upon  keeping  the  people  in 
a  state  of  perpetual  pupilage.    It  is  a  policy  which  arises 


SECTARIANISM  59 

not  out  of  the  needs  of  the  community  but  is  dictated  by 
an  Italian  pope.  Should  it  succeed — and  with  immigra- 
tion and  (if  I  were  not  misunderstood,  I  would  add)  with 
women's  suffrage  it  may  succeed — then  the  republic  is 
doomed. 

But  if  there  could  be  co-operation  among  Protestants  to 
secure  that  which  our  fathers  bequeathed  to  us,  it  would 
be  found  that  many  devout  Roman  Catholics  would  unite 
with  us  in  the  endeavor  to  perpetuate  the  liberty  which  is 
as  dear  to  some  of  them  as  it  is  to  us.  That  this  is  not  idle 
speculation  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  when  an  attempt 
was  made  a  few  years  ago,  in  the  city  of  Boston,  to  dis- 
tribute the  school  fund  on  a  sectarian  basis,  it  was  de- 
feated by  a  decisive  majority,  notwithstanding  that  Boston 
is  now  a  Roman  Catholic  city.  A  Protestant  fellowship 
which  would  create  an  atmosphere  of  true  democracy 
would  be  welcome  to  not  a  few  of  our  Roman  Catholic 
fellow  citizens. 

Such  considerations  wiU  have  but  little  effect  upon  those 
who  feel  that  the  glory  of  the  "ages  of  faith''  as  shown  in 
the  splendor  of  Gothic  architecture  and  the  "visible 
unity"  of  the  church  would  be  the  cure  for  the  "philistine" 
Protestant  attitude  to  art  and  the  sectarianism  which  has 
torn  the  body  of  Christ.  But  they  are  mistaken  in  two 
respects:  first,  they  are  identifying  mediaevaHsm  with  the 
beautiful,  and,  secondly,  are  assuming  that  outward  con- 
formity is  to  be  identified  with  spiritual  unity. 

The  mediaeval  mind  revealed  a  form  of  extravagant  in- 
tellectualism  which  is  akin  to  insanity.  It  was  essentially 
monastic,  and  had  the  church  been  able  permanently  to 
dominate  the  world,  the  result  would  have  been  neither 
beautiful  nor  wise.    But 

"Stone  walls  do  not  a  prison  make, 
Nor  iron  bars  a  cage." 

Neither  the  mind  nor  the  body  of  men  and  women  could 
be  permanently  immured  in  a  cloister.    There  swept  over 


6o  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  arid  religious  life  of  Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages  a 
great  wave  of  emotionalism.*  It  took  many  forms,  the 
best  known  being  the  mission  of  St.  Francis.  To  him  came 
the  ** still  small  voice"  of  nature,  a  veritable  benediction  to 
men  who  had  been  driven  well-nigh  frantic  by  the  fear  of 
hell.  The  troubadours  began  to  sing  the  joys  of  human 
love;  the  Crusaders  brought  from  the  East  both  science  and 
art;  modern  literature  began  to  speak  in  a  language  "un- 
derstanded"  by  the  people.  To  the  church  this  seemed  a 
second  barbaric  invasion.  It  could  not  convert  it,  as  it 
had  the  former,  so  it  compromised.  The  terror  of  God 
and  of  the  avenging  Christ  was  tempered  by  the  presenta- 
tion for  devotion  of  the  ever-pitiful  Mother  of  God.  Human 
love  was  turned  to  the  love  of  the  ideal  woman,  and  science 
and  art  were  employed  to  build  and  enrich  shrines  of 
beauty,  not  for  the  worship  of  the  "one  true  God  and  Jesus 
Christ  whom  he  had  sent,"  but  for  the  adoration  of  Mary, 
"ever  Virgin,  the  Eternal  Woman."  f  This  was  the  in- 
evitable reaction  from  monasricism.  The  towers  and 
fieches  of  these  wonders  of  art  are  what  we  see,  but  the 
spiritual  foundations  on  which  they  were  built  we  do  not 
see.  We  forget  that  the  vast  sums  given  for  these  glori- 
ous buildings  were  given  by  those  who  hoped  in  this  way 
to  placate  the  God  whom  they  feared,  not  to  adore  the 
Father  whom  they  loved. 

The  cathedrals  are  the  last  monimients  of  the  ages  of 
faith.  Art  and  science  soon  emancipated  themselves  from 
the  domination  of  the  church,  and  then  chateaux  for  the 
life  of  the  family — alas,  too  often  for  the  enjoyment  of  lust 
— and  splendid  municipal  buildings,  fit  symbols  of  the  new 
feeling  of  the  glory  of  the  civil  life,  engaged  the  energy  of 
architect  and  builder.  These  were  some  of  the  causes 
which  later  produced  what  we  call  the  Renaissance.  To 
this  the  Catholic  Church  succumbed.    Nothing  but  a  sec- 

*  See  "The  Medieeval  Mind,"  H.  O.  Taylor,  vol.  I,  pp.  349-350. 
t  See  "Mont  St.  Michel  and  Chartres,"  Henry  Adams. 


SECTARIANISM  6i 

ond  revolution,  which  we  call  the  Reformation,  saved  the 
world  from  the  debauchery  of  sensuality  to  which  the 
Renaissance,  uninspired  by  the  religion  of  Jesus,  to  which 
the  church  had  succumbed,  was  tending.  Leo  X,  one  of 
the  most  cultivated  gentlemen  of  Europe,  was  as  truly 
a  pagan  as  Alcibiades,  yet  he  was  the  vicar  of  Christ; 
Benvenuto  Cellini  was  a  "commimicant  in  good  stand- 
ing"!* 

This  second  revolution  the  church  lacked  the  spiritual 
power  to  convert.  Consequently  it  fell  back  upon  the  only 
weapon  left,  which  was  persecution,  a  spirit  which  reached 
its  culmination  in  the  Inquisition.  But  persecution  is  the 
distinctive  mark  of  sectarianism.  Any  company  of  men 
who  believe  that  they  have  an  exclusive  monopoly  of  the 
truth  of  God  will  be  driven  by  an  inexorable  logic  to  per- 
secute those  who  oppose  themselves  to  that  truth.  That 
does  not  mean  that  they  are  necessarily  devoid  of  the 
spirit  of  kindliness — ^Torquemada  may  have  been  as  gen- 
tle in  his  personal  feelings  as  any  modern  humanitarian; 
just  as  doubtless  many  of  the  German  soldiers  whose  ruth- 
lessness  shocked  the  world,  were  gentle  and  considerate  in 
their  family  lives.  But  when  any  man  believes  that  he  is 
the  official  of  an  institution  to  which  God  has  committed 
the  guidance  of  the  world,  and  that  without  that  guidance 
the  world  must  perish,  he  will  feel  justified  in  the  employ- 

*  The  Anglican  was  the  only  church  in  the  sixteenth  century  which 
seemed  to  understand  the  spiritual  significance  of  the  Renaissance. 
The  Roman  Church  was  impotent  to  deal  with  it,  because  its  highest 
ideal  of  religion  was  expressed  in  the  asceticism  of  the  monastic  life; 
but  the  Elizabethan  era  showed  that  England  had  received  the  message 
of  the  Renaissance.  The  joy  of  living  inspired  the  Sea  Rovers  with  the 
spirit  of  adventure.  The  beauty  of  life  shines  through  all  the  poetry  of 
that  day,  especially  in  that  of  Spenser  and  Shakespeare.  But  the  King 
James  translation  of  the  Bible  shows  the  literary  influence  of  the 
Renaissance,  and  the  compilation  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is 
the  embodiment  of  the  new  thought  of  religion  expressed  not  in  ascet- 
icism but  in  the  fulness  of  life.  Here  is  where  the  Renaissance,  that  in 
many  respects  was  a  pagan  revival,  was  also  a  recognition  of  the  truth 
that  Christ  had  come  to  give  life  abundantly. 


62  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

ment  of  any  means  which  will  save  the  world.  The  Ger- 
man would  have  saved  it  from  lawlessness  to  Kultur;  the 
mediaevaHst  would  have  saved  it  from  an  endless  hell  of 
torture.  The  greater  the  salvation  promised,  the  less  will 
be  the  horror  of  the  means  used  to  insure  salvation;  the 
greater  will  seem  the  justification  in  their  employment. 
Even  such  a  saint  as  Xavier  believed  that  the  Inquisition 
was  the  only  means  of  saving  a  world  for  which  he  was 
willing  to  die. 

It  may  be  asked:  "Does  any  sane  man  believe  that  the 
American  Catholic  Church  in  this  twentieth  century  would 
re-establish  the  Inquisition  ?"  The  answer  is  that  there  is 
no  such  thing  as  an  "American"  Catholic  Church.  The 
dominating  power  is  a  foreign  pope,  himself  dominated  by 
the  Jesuits,  who  are  the  embodiment  of  the  mediaeval  spirit 
and  are  contemptuous  of  the  spirit  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury. At  present  the  spirit  of  persecution  is  impotent  be- 
cause the  spirit  of  toleration  animates  the  governments  of 
the  world,  and  they  control  the  church.  Therefore,  there 
is  no  danger  of  such  persecutions  as  have  stained  the  gar- 
ments of  the  church  in  the  past.  But  it  does  not  follow 
that  this  would  continue  were  the  modern  spirit  to  become 
impotent.  We  have  only  to  look  at  the  Balkans  and  at 
Ireland  to  see  what  we  owe  to  the  spirit  of  toleration,  which 
John  Hay  called  a  "principle  of  international  law  and 
eternal  justice." 

But  tiiere  is  no  need  to  dwell  upon  this,  for  no  doubt  it 
will  be  said  that  it  is  the  expression  of  prejudice. 

Let  us  turn  then  to  two  statements — one  from  a  distin- 
guished historian  of  the  Roman  Catholic  communion  and 
the  other  from  a  prelate  of  the  papal  household. 

"The  Inquisition  is  pecuKarly  the  weapon  and  peculiarly 
the  work  of  the  popes.  It  stands  out  from  all  those  things 
in  which  they  co-operated,  followed,  or  assented,  as  the 
distinctive  feature  of  papal  Rome.  ...  It  is  the  principal 
thing  with  which  the  papacy  is  identified  and  by  which  it 


SECTARIANISM  63 

must  be  judged.  The  principle  of  the  Inquisition  is  mur- 
derous, and  a  man's  opinion  of  the  papacy  is  regulated 
and  determined  by  his  opinion  about  religious  assassina- 
tion."* 

"Some  sons  of  darkness  nowadays  with  dilated  nostrils 
and  wild  eyes  inveigh  against  the  intolerance  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages.  But  let  not  us,  blinded  by  that  liberalism  that 
bewitches  under  the  guise  of  wisdom,  seek  for  silly  little 
reasons  to  defend  the  Inquisition!  Let  no  one  speak  of 
the  condition  of  the  times  and  intemperate  zeal,  as  if  the 
church  needed  excuses.  O,  blessed  flames  of  those  pyres 
by  which  a  very  few  crafty  and  insignificant  persons  were 
taken  away  that  hundreds  of  hundreds  of  phalanxes  of 
souls  should  be  saved  from  the  jaws  of  error  and  eternal 
damnation!    O  noble  and  venerable  memory  of  Torque- 

madai^'t 

The  latter  quotation  will  excite  the  horror  of  some  and 
the  risibles  of  others.  Yet  I  think  it  not  unfair  to  say  that 
both  quotations  represent  the  thought  of  different  minds 
in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 

Protestants  have,  however,  no  right  to  boast  as  if  their 
fathers  had  not  shared  the  delusion  that  error  is  identical 
with  heresy,  and  that  it  was  better  that  "one  man  die  than 
that  the  whole  nation  perish."  There  is  scarcely  one  of 
the  Reformers  who  was  not  guilty  of  bloodshed.  But  this 
may  be  said  with  truth,  that  the  Reformers  carried  over 
that  heresy  from  the  mediaeval  church,  as  they  did  much 
else  that  it  has  taken  time  to  shed,  but  they  have  not 
gloried  in  their  shame,  nor  would  it  be  possible  to  find  to- 
day in  any  Protestant  church  a  respectable  man  who  would 
declare  persecution  to  be  justified.  Nor  is  this  due  to  the 
fact  that  they  have  become  tolerant  because  they  are  in- 

*  "  Lord  Acton's  Letters  to  Mary  Gladstone,"  p.  298/.,  quoted  in  "The 
Age  of  the  Reformation,"  Preserved  Smith,  p.  643. 

t  C.  Mirbt,  "Quellen  zur  Geschichte  des  Papsttums,"  quoted  in 
ibid.,  p.  390. 


64  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

different,  but  because  they  have  learned  that  error  is 
neither  heresy  nor  sin.  And  because  they  have  learned 
this,  they  no  longer  look  to  the  state  to  enforce  uniformity 
of  belief  or  worship.  They  are  living  in  a  new  world  and 
breathing  a  purer  atmosphere.  It  was  this  better  spirit 
which  animated  our  fathers  when  they  endeavored  to  effect 
a  more  perfect  union  under  which  the  inalienable  rights  of 
the  individual  might  be  secure. 

Nor  are  those  who  dream  of  a  revival  of  the  ages  of  faith 
less  mistaken  in  their  dream  of  unity.  The  divisions  of 
Protestantism  can  be  matched  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  in  days  of  old  and  now.  Franciscan  and  Domini- 
can, Nominalist  and  Realist,  Gallican  and  Ultramontane, 
Jesuit  and  Port  Royalist,  Catholic  and  "Papalist"  in  Eng- 
land, "American"  and  Irish  Catholics  in  this  land,  show 
that  the  inevitable  groupings  of  men  in  congenial  com- 
panies is  a  perpetual  social  phenomenon.  While  all  this 
must  be  admitted  by  every  student  of  history,  it  may  be 
urged  that  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  this  is  mitigated 
by  the  central  authority,  to  which  all  must  submit.  If  all 
that  is  desired  be  uniformity,  this  is  a  complete  answer; 
but  if  we  are  seeking  spiritual  unity,  it  has  little  significance. 
The  meaning  of  conformity  and  its  spiritual  value  can  be 
seen  by  a  reading  of  the  "Life  of  Cardinal  Manning."  * 
Was  there  truer  unity  between  Manning  and  Newman 
when  they  had  entered  into  the  bosom  of  the  mother  church 
than  there  had  been  in  the  days  when  they  both  were  min- 
isters of  the  Church  of  England?  Those  who  say  yes 
should  examine  what  they  mean  by  unity.  Henry  Ward 
Beecher,  whose  homely  wit  reminds  us  of  Lincoln,  was 
once  asked  what  he  thought  about  the  unity  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church.  He  said:  "There  is  no  more  unity  in  the 
Catholic  Church  than  there  is  among  Protestants.  The 
difference  is  like  the  life  in  the  tenements  and  in  the  sep- 

*  See  "Life  of  Cardinal  Manning,"  S.  Purcell,  Member  of  the  Roman 
Academy  of  Letters. 


SECTARIANISM  65 

arate  houses  in  the  village.  The  tenement  may  seem  to 
one  outside  to  be  the  abode  of  peace,  while  it  might  seem 
as  if  a  riot  were  about  to  break  out  in  the  village,  so  great 
is  the  noise.  But  if  you  went  into  the  tenement,  you  would 
find  the  tenants  quarrelling  on  the  stairs,  just  as  the  neigh- 
bors in  the  village  are  disputing  over  the  fence." 

It  is  not  outward  conformity  which  constitutes  unity 
nor  is  it  groupings  into  separate  bodies  which  is  of  the 
essence  of  schism.  Schism  is  the  spirit  which  first  denies 
that  the  word  of  God  has  come  to  any  save  those  with 
whom  we  find  ourselves  in  agreement,  and  then  persecutes 
those  who  do  not  follow  us.  From  the  first  sin  no  Protes- 
tant church  is  entirely  free;  the  second  is  ingrained  in  the 
Roman  CathoUc  Church.  It  is  quiescent  now,  but  were 
that  church  to  become  dominant  in  this  land  it  would  be 
the  triumph  not  of  the  One  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church; 
it  would  be  the  triumph  of  the  greatest  sect  in  the  history 
of  the  Christian  church.  Those  who  think  that  the  cure 
for  sectarianism  is  to  be  found  in  the  extension  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  are  deceived  by  outward  appear- 
ance.   The  cure  must  be  found  elsewhere. 

A  sentimental  idealization  of  the  Roman  CathoKc  Church 
is  characteristic  not  only  of  some  religious  people  but  of 
not  a  few  who,  having  failed  to  fulfil  their  obligations  as 
members  of  one  of  the  Protestant  churches,  would  like  to 
throw  the  responsibihty  upon  the  church  which  would  have 
saved  them  and  they  "would  not."  They  may  decry 
Protestantism  and  idealize  the  Catholic  Church,  but  in  so 
doing  they  have  left  the  firm  ground  of  history  and  are 
floating  amidst  the  clouds  of  an  imaginary  emotion.  They 
might  know  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  essentially 
static,  and  that  does  not  mean,  as  is  often  supposed,  that 
it  is  truly  conservative;  it  means  that  the  people  have  been 
kept  in  a  state  of  perpetual  pupilage  and  have  not  known 
the  days  in  which  they  are  living.  Its  aestheticism  is 
pagan,  not  Christian.    The  mystic  appeal  in  the  sacrifice 


66  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

of  the  mass  runs  back,  not  to  the  new  man  but  to  the  old 
Adam,  and  is  drawn  from  the  "mystery''  religions  which 
themselves  run  back  to  the  primitive  animism  which  could 
feed  on  the  very  flesh  of  the  god.  The  power  of  the  mediae- 
val church  lay  not  in  the  institution,  with  its  insistence 
upon  force,  but  upon  the  cross  which  it  lifted  up,  and  so 
drew  men  to  Christ  himself.  Its  discipline,  which  it  is  the 
fashion  to  applaud  among  those  who  have  lost  faith  in 
democracy,  is  autocratic,  and  would  use  democracy  for 
the  re-establishment  of  a  discredited  autocracy.  These 
are  not  pleasant  things  to  say,  but  they  are  true,  and 
ought  to  be  said  if  thereby  the  Church  of  Christ  can  be 
saved. 

If  the  foregoing  be  a  true,  even  though  to  some  it  may 
seem  too  dark  a  picture,  both  of  the  world  and  of  the  church, 
we  shall  be  compelled  to  confess  that  neither  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  nor  any  one  of  the  Protestant  churches 
alone,  nor  any  superficial  confederation  of  the  churches  can 
accomplish  the  task  of  evangelizing  the  world,  spiritualizing 
civilization,  and  keeping  alive  that  conception  of  the  gos- 
pel which  the  Reformation  brought  to  light  after  the  dark- 
ness which  fell  upon  the  world  after  the  fall  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  upon  which,  we  believe,  the  welfare  of  the  repub- 
lic depends.  If  we  do  not  wish  to  drift  out  to  the  sea  of 
controversy  and  lose  sight  of  all  landmarks  of  reality,  we 
shall  do  well  to  confine  ourselves  for  the  present  to  the 
practical  problem  of  Protestant  unity.  For,  if  the  mission 
of  the  church  is  to  evangehze  the  world  and  its  task  is  the 
spiritualization  of  civilization,  and  we  admit,  as  we  must, 
that  neither  of  these  things  is  being  done  as  it  should  be 
done,  we  are  driven  to  ask:  "What  is  the  cause  of  the  weak- 
ness of  the  churches  ? "  The  reason  often  given  is  that  it 
is  because  the  church  is  broken  up  into  the  many  churches. 
But  if  we  probed  deeper  we  might  find  that  it  is  no  external 
division  which  weakens  the  church.  It  is  the  spirit  of  sec- 
tarianism, which  paralyzed  the  spirit  of  Jonah  and  para- 


SECTARIANISM  67 

lyzes  the  modem  church.  When  the  essence  of  sectarian- 
ism is  clearly  understood,  the  way  will  be  open  for  a  truer 
understanding  of  the  meaning  of  unity.  To  a  considera- 
tion, then,  of  what  we  mean  by  uxdty  let  us  now  turn. 


CHAPTER  VI 
ORGANIC  UNITY 

If  it  be  true  that  the  largest  group  of  Christian  people 
in  the  Western  world  have  not  attained  to  spiritual  unity 
and  are  no  more  free  from  the  sin  of  schism  than  is  the 
smallest  and  most  insignificant  group,  and  if,  on  the  other 
hand,  unity  is  the  one  thing  needed  to  enable  the  church 
to  fulfil  its  mission  and  accomplish  its  task,  what  is  the 
nature  of  that  unity  and  where  is  it  to  be  found  ? 

There  is  no  question  which  has  been  more  frequently 
discussed  in  ecclesiastical  circles  during  the  last  fifteen 
years  than  that  of  church  unity.  While  it  is  generally 
admitted  that  unity  is  essential  for  the  well-being  of  the 
church,  it  has  not  been  so  evident  that  the  nature  of  that 
unity  has  been  clearly  understood,  and,  as  a  consequence, 
men's  minds  have  been  bemused  by  various  theories  which 
have  pushed  experience  and  observation  into  the  back- 
ground. To  some  of  these  theories  we  must  now  turn, 
even  at  the  risk  of  being  thought  to  have  wandered  from 
our  subject. 

How  often  we  come  across  some  such  statement  as  the 
following:  "Our  unhappy  divisions  not  only  weaken  the 
church  but  are  out  of  date  because  a  nobler  conception  of 
the  meaning  of  the  church  has  been  granted  to  us  in  this 
day  than  was  known  to  those  who  lived  in  the  days  which 
immediately  followed  the  Reformation.  Unity  has  been 
the  goal  of  the  national  movements  which  have  made  great 
the  nations  of  the  world  in  the  last  fifty  years.  In  the 
United  States  the  vision  of  unity  rose,  in  the  Civil  War, 
like  a  *  cloudy,  fiery  pillar,'  and  the  influence  of  America 
was  felt  in  Italy  and  Germany.  These  were  manifesta- 
tions of  an  instinct  of  humanity  which  is  unconsciously 

68 


ORGANIC  UNITY  69 

actuated  by  a  truth,  the  full  significance  of  which  is  not 
understood.  That  truth  is  that  humanity  is  an  organism. 
When  that  truth  is  ignored;  when  it  is  forgotten  that  the 
welfare  of  the  individual  is  dependent  upon  the  welfare  of 
the  whole;  when  the  individual  has  been  made  the  end  of 
life;  then  we  see  competition  in  the  economic  life,  solipsism 
in  philosophy,  hedonism  in  ethics,  and  sectarianism  in  re- 
ligion." 

That  this  represents  a  wide-spread  feeling  cannot  be 
denied.  It  is  the  foundation  on  which  many  plans  for 
social  reform  rest.  But  when  for  humanity  we  substitute 
some  special  group,  the  doctrine  may  prove  false.  Because 
the  ocean  rises  and  falls  with  the  tide,  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  local  pond  or  even  the  Great  Lakes  are  so  moved. 
Humanity  may  be  an  organism,  but  special  groups,  such 
as  a  state  or  a  church  or  a  labor-union,  may  not  be  an 
organism.  Because  this  has  been  overlooked,  the  mediae- 
val church  claimed  to  be  an  organism;  so  did  the  German 
state,  and  so  to-day  does  the  Russian  Soviet  government. 

An  organism  is  a  structure  composed  of  various  organs 
which  are  dependent  upon  the  composite  structure  for  their 
existence.  Each  organ  presupposes  the  existence  and  ne- 
cessity of  every  other  organ  in  the  complex  structure.  The 
most  familiar  form  of  an  organism  is  the  human  body,  in 
which  we  recognize  that  no  one  of  the  organs  could  Hve 
and  function  apart  from  the  whole.  From  this  analogy 
the  theory  of  social  organic  unity  arose.  The  organs  or 
the  limbs  of  the  state  were  supposed  to  be  the  individuals 
who  compose  the  community.  Therefore  the  life  and  wel- 
fare of  the  state  is  the  final  cause  of  the  existence  of  the 
individual.  But  two  things  have  been  forgotten  in  this 
exposition:  first,  that  the  individual  does  not  correspond  to 
the  organs  or  limbs  of  the  body,  but,  rather,  to  the  cells 
which  are  the  fimdamental  and,  perhaps,  indestructible  ele- 
ments in  the  body.  The  human  body  is  composed  of  a 
vast  number  of  cells,  each  having  a  semi-independent  life. 


70  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

But  the  life,  whatever  may  be  its  nature,  whether  mechani- 
cal, chemical,  or  spiritual,  is  what  supports  the  structure. 
The  structure  makes  the  conditions  for  co-ordination  but 
does  not  provide  the  life.  It  is  true  that  unless  these  cells 
are  sensitized  and  motorized  by  the  cortex  of  the  brain 
there  results,  not  harmonious  activity,  but  a  sort  of  "  twitch- 
ing," which  is  a  sign  of  nervous  disorder.  This  semi-inde- 
pendence of  the  cells  is  declared  to  be  analogous  to  "anar- 
chy" in  the  state,  when  certain  individuals  refuse  to  obey 
the  inhibitions  of  the  higher  commands  which,  it  is  claimed, 
answer  to  the  brain  in  the  human  body.  "Perfect  national 
life  requires  the  absolute  subordination  of  the  individual 
to  the  will  of  the  state."  This  had  been  the  teaching  in 
regard  to  the  church  before  it  was  applied  to  the  state, 
and,  if  it  be  true,  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not  be 
applied  to  a  labor-union  or  any  other  group.  From  this 
solenm  dogmatism  one  is  tempted  to  turn  to  a  wise  book 
called  "Father  Tom  and  the  Pope."  In  it  there  is  a  scene 
in  which  Father  Tom,  after  listening  to  an  explanation  by 
the  pope  of  one  of  the  mysteries  of  the  faith,  exclaims  witi 
enthusiasm:  ^'Verum  pro  te;  true  for  you,  Holy  Father; 
the  figures  of  speech  are  the  pillars  of  the  church."  This 
wise  saying  seems  to  have  been  forgotten  by  some  modem 
philosophers,  who  have  made  the  fatal  mistake  of  confusing 
analogy  with  identity. 

From  early  times  the  relation  of  the  different  members 
of  the  composite  structure  called  the  human  body  has  been 
used  as  an  illustration  of  the  relation  of  the  individual  to 
society.  It  is  so  used  by  St.  Paul;  and,  properly  under- 
stood, is  as  illuminating  to-day  as  it  was  of  old.  There 
should  be  in  the  social  order  ^e  same  harmony  which  is 
exhibited  in  a  well-functioning  organism.  But  to  declare 
that  a  political  or  ecclesiastical  or  industrial  corporation  in 
the  social  order  is  an  organism  in  the  sense  that  the  individ- 
uals who  compose  it  are  to  be  subordinated  to  some  higher 
will  in  the  group  analogous  to  the  "inhibiting"  brain  in 


ORGANIC  UNITY  71 

the  human  body  is  to  fall  into  the  mediaeval  error  of  de- 
ducing a  fact  from  a  dogma,  and,  could  it  be  carried  into 
effect,  would  lead  us  back  to  the  tyranny  of  the  mediaeval 
church  or  to  the  ruthlessness  of  Germany  in  the  Great  War, 
or  to  murderous  strikes  and  their  brutal  repressions. 

The  German  theory  of  the  state  was  partly  an  inheri- 
tance from  the  mediaeval  church  and  partly  a  reaction 
from  Rousseau's  doctrine  of  the  social  contract.  It  is  true 
that  human  society  did  not  arise  in  the  way  Rousseau  sup- 
posed. The  probability  is  that  it  was  fear — first,  the  fear 
of  the  wild  beasts  and  then  of  man,  the  enemy — ^which 
made  association  necessary;  then  the  clever  and  the  strong 
compelled  the  stupid  and  the  weak  to  do  their  will,  and  so 
the  state  came  to  be.  But  this  is  not  the  whole  story. 
Why  should  love  be  excluded  ?  We  know  that  sexual  im- 
pulse played  an  important  part  in  the  earliest  social  activ- 
ity as  it  does  to-day.  But  did  not  also  friendship,  the 
yearning  for  companionship,  passing  the  love  of  women, 
influence  primitive  man  and  form  an  essential  element  in 
the  cement  which  held  together  the  primitive  society  ?  It 
was  not  a  "voluntary"  association  which  produced  the 
primitive  society,  for  the  individual  had  not  yet  been  dif- 
ferentiated from  the  mass;  force  was  the  necessary  protec- 
tion of  the  individual  as  well  as  of  the  social  group.  It 
was  a  necessary  element  in  the  social  evolution,  but  it  is 
not  the  last  nor  the  highest.  Therefore  Rousseau  was 
right  ideally.  The  ideal  society  will  be  the  voluntary 
association  and  co-operation  of  individuals  for  self-realiza- 
tion and  a  common  good.  St.  Paul  had  a  truer  conception 
of  society  when  he  called  upon  each  individual  to  subordi- 
nate himself  willingly  for  the  welfare  of  the  whole  body. 

But  no  more  in  society  than  in  the  individual  can  it  be 
said  that  unity  is  produced  by  the  unwilling  subordination 
of  one  member  to  any  other  nor  to  a  majority  of  all. 
When  the  analogy  is  pressed  to  the  point  where  it  is 
asserted  that  there  is  in  the  social  organism  something  an- 


72  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

swering  to  the  brain  of  the  individual,  which  the  members 
must  all  obey,  there  are  many  fallacies  which  creep  in 
under  the  cloak  of  a  figure  of  speech.  For,  in  the  first 
place,  it  is  not  the  obedience  of  the  many  members  to  the 
commands  of  the  brain  which  is  the  cause  for  unity;  the 
unity  may  become  more  effective  in  that  way,  but  the  unity 
itself  pre-existed.  The  brain  is  itself  no  more  than  the 
material  instrument  through  which  the  life  reveals  itself 
to  every  part;  that  is,  it  is  the  medium  of  communication, 
but  also  a  member  of  the  body,  and  can  no  more  claim  to 
be  the  "body"  than  can  the  ''hand"  or  the  "foot."  Each 
member  of  an  organism  presupposes  the  existence  and  ne- 
cessity of  every  other  member,  and  all  are  dependent,  not 
upon  some  mechanical  arrangement  of  the  different  parts, 
but  upon  the  current  of  life  which  flows  through  all  and 
constitutes  their  unity.  When  that  life  current  ceases  to 
flow,  the  body  remains  for  a  time  apparently  complete,  but 
we  know  that  it  has  become  a  corpse — ^no  longer  an  organ- 
ism but  a  thing.  That  which  made  it  an  organism  was 
the  habitation  of  the  spirit.  Only  in  this  way  does  man 
become  a  living  soul.* 

"But,"  it  may  be  asked,  "is  there  nothing  in  the  social 
organism  which  corresponds  to  the  brain  in  the  body  and 
sends  its  commanding  message  to  every  part  ?"  There  is, 
but  it  is  not  material  but  spiritual.  It  is  conscience,  or 
the  consciousness  of  God  which  makes  a  true  spiritual 
organism. 

St.  Paul  says  that  every  Christian  is  a  "temple  of  the 
Holy  Spirit."  That  means  that  every  Christian  is  an 
organ  of  God — a  true  organism.  Yet  no  one  will  say  that 
the  best  of  men  is  a  complete  organism  in  the  sense  that 
through  his  life  the  full  harmony  of  God  resounds.    But 

*  "The  difference  between  a  mechanical  whole  and  an  organic  whole 
is  that  the  former  may  be  regarded  as  the  sum  of  its  parts,  and  the 
latter  is  something  more  or  something  other  than  the  sum  of  its  parts." 
—"Moral  Values  and  the  Idea  of  God,"  W.  R.  Sorley,  p.  155. 


ORGANIC  UNITY  73 

there  are  men  who  say:  "While  this  is  true,  the  church  is 
an  organism  in  the  sense  that  the  individual  is  not."  What 
does  that  mean  ?  In  what  sense  is  it  true  ?  Has  any 
church  known  in  history  been  the  perfect  organ  of  God  ? 
There  can  be  but  one  answer.  St.  Paul's  hope  was  that 
the  church  in  his  day  might  grow  "till  it  became  such  an 
organ,  so  that  through  it  the  glory  of  God  would  sound 
forth  in  perfect  harmony."  But  that  hope  was  based  on 
the  expectation  of  the  immediate  return  of  his  Lord. 
Later  he  learned  that  it  was  to  be  the  result  of  ages  of 
education.  For  the  apostle  knew  that  the  only  organism 
which  could  show  forth  the  glory  of  God  is  humanity,  and 
by  humanity  he  meant  the  human  race  into  which  each 
individual  brought  his  conscience  as  a  contribution  to  the 
common  consciousness  of  mankind,  acting  in  the  unity  of 
the  spirit,  in  the  bond  of  peace,  and  in  righteousness  of 
life.*  The  first  step  toward  that  goal  was  to  make  all  men 
see  what  is  the  "mystery"  or  "secret"  which  Christ  had 
made  known,  which  is  the  meaning  of  humanity.  "When 
the  reign  of  Christ  is  complete  the  end  will  come  and  the 

*  "An  organism  is  that  in  which  life  is  exercising  itself  toward  greater 
complexity  and  greater  variety,  and  which,  while  it  makes  a  portion  of 
life  its  very  own,  lives  also  within  that  ocean  of  life  which  is  our  uni- 
verse. There  is  no  limit  to  the  life  it  can  use  for  its  own  ends,  because 
to  the  organism  its  universe  is  practically  infinite;  that  is,  limited  in 
the  capacity  of  the  organism  to  utilize  the  life  for  its  own  ends;  and  it 
is  the  power  to  use  fully  what  is  given  it  for  its  own  end,  when  that 
end  is  in  harmony  with  God,  that  would  be  its  perfection.  We  see  the 
fostering  purpose  in  the  teaching  and  training  of  organisms  to  use 
more  and  more  of  what  is  given  them  for  more  and  more  perfect  ends, 
while  all  the  time  autonomy  consists  in  the  organism  being  able  to 
accept  this  influence  or  to  use  life  for  retrograde  ends.  .  .  .  We  find 
that  this  last-developed,  and  as  it  seems  to  us  highest,  form  in  which 
human  life  can  rightly  exercise  itself  (spiritual  life),  gives  man  more 
power  than  any  other  of  drawing  in  deep  draughts  of  the  universal  life, 
and  using  it  to  fashion  some  portion  of  the  earth  into  some  higher 
stage  in  which  the  purpose  of  God  can  bear  upon  it  more  directly." — 
"Voluntas  Dei,"  pp.  40-41. 

If  the  church  be  conceived  as  an  organism,  it  will  have  to  be  remem- 
bered that  it  is  capable  of  degeneration  as  well  as  regeneration. 


74  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

kingdom  be  delivered  to  God  the  Father  because  God  then 
will  be  all  and  in  all."  The  divine  organism  is  a  hope,  not 
a  reality.  If  that  is  borne  in  mind  we  shall  be  justified  in 
speaking  of  the  church  as  an  organism,  because  we  believe 
it  the  most  perfect  means  known  to  man  for  keeping  the 
hope  alive  and  making  the  "secret"  known  to  mankind. 
But  it  can  be  called  an  organism  only  by  a  figure  of  speech; 
it  is  so  called  as  the  expression  of  a  hope  but  not  as  the 
description  of  a  reality.*  The  church  is  that  part,  and 
the  only  part,  of  humanity  which  has  learned  the  meaning 
of  human  life — that  it  is  predestinated  to  be  the  organ  of 
God.  But  if  the  church  may  ideally  be  spoken  of  as  the 
divine  organism,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  it  is  not  such 
because  of  its  visible  structure  or  frame,  but  because  it  is 
filled  with  the  spirit.  Nor  must  it  be  pretended  that' the 
spirit  dwells  in  an  imaginary  whole  but  not  in  the  real 
parts,  or  that  it  animated  the  church  in  the  past  and  is 
not  dweUing  in  the  church  to-day.  No  one  of  the  many 
churches  is  without  the  witness  of  the  spirit,  and  no  one 
has  a  monopoly  of  it,  nor  do  all  the  churches  taken  in  their 
totality  contain  the  full  life  of  God.  So  while  we  are  not 
justified  in  saying  that  any  one  of  the  churches  in  the 
past,  or  now  existing,  no  matter  how  ancient  its  organiza- 
tion or  splendid  its  ritual  or  profound  its  theology,  is  the 
divine  organ,  we  are  justified  in  saying  that  there  is  not 
one  of  them,  no  matter  how  recent  its  organization  or 
meagre  its  worship  or  inadequate  its  philosophy,  which  is 
not  a  "stop"  in  the  divine  instrument,  and  does  not  play 
an  essential  part  in  the  great  symphony  of  redemption. 
It  is  because  the  sublime  spiritual  ideal  which  St.  Paul  was 
the  first  to  see  has  been  obscured  by  the  mists  of  "error, 
ignorance,  pride,  and  prejudice"  that  we  have  identified 

**'The  ethical  unity  of  the  universe  is  a  unity  to  be  attained.  It 
does  not  belong  in  its  completeness  to  any  stage  of  the  time-process, 
but  only  to  its  realized  purpose." — "Moral  Values  and  the  Idea  of 
God,"  W.  R.  Sorley,  p.  456. 


ORGANIC  UNITY  75 

organism  with  organization,  and  supposed  that  corporate 
unity  was  the  same  as  organic  unity.  The  latter  is  a  sub- 
lime hope;  the  former  is  an  undesirable  impossibility. 

It  is  because  this  fundamental  truth  has  been  overlooked 
and  men  have  fixed  their  attention  on  the  external  that 
they  have  failed  to  understand  the  internal  and  spiritual 
Hfe,  without  which  there  can  be  no  organism,  and,  as  a 
consequence,  have  been  driven  to  believe  that  force  must 
be  appUed  to  compel  the  individual  to  submit.  The  Ger- 
mans reverted  to  the  primitive  type  of  society  and,  there- 
fore, force  was  the  essential  element  in  the  social  structure 
as  they  conceived  it.  No  doubt,  force  must  for  a  long 
time  be  the  necessary  means  for  preventing  anarchy,  which 
would  be  as  fatal  to  the  individual  as  to  society  at  large. 
But  it  is  not  ideal,  that  is,  it  cannot  be  the  final  will  of 
God.  As  long  as  force  is  believed  to  be  the  essential 
cement  of  society,  the  "anarchist"  will  be  necessary.  For 
he  has  often  been  the  most  effective  witness  to  the  ideal 
order.  Such  was  Jeremiah  in  the  days  of  old.  "Behold, 
I  have  made  thee  this  day  a  defenced  city,  and  an  iron  pil- 
lar, and  brazen  walls  against  the  whole  land,  against  the 
kings  of  Judah,  against  the  princes  thereof,  against  the 
priests  thereof,  and  against  the  people  of  the  land.  And 
they  shall  fight  against  thee;  but  they  shall  not  prevail 
against  thee;  for  I  am  with  thee,  saith  the  Lord,  to  deliver 
thee."  *  Such  an  anarchist  was  William  Lloyd  Garrison; 
he  and  other  early  abolitionists  would  not  obey  an  inhuman 
law.  They  suffered  patiently  the  penalty  of  their  lawless- 
ness, strong  in  their  faith  that  their  fellow  countrymen 
would  one  day  see,  and  do  the  right.  Thus  it  has  ever 
been  with  the  men  "bom  out  of  due  time."  They  are  in 
advance  of  their  day;  they  see  a  better  country,  and  bear 
witness  to  it.  The  ideal  anarchist  refuses  to  submit  to  a 
custom  which  he  believes  to  be  a  menace  to  the  well-being 
of  society.  He  will  not  consent  to  the  perpetuation  of  a 
♦Jeremiah  i  :  18,  19. 


76  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

wrong  which  he  believes  would  prevent  the  social  order 
which  is  about  to  be;  rather  wiU  he  die  to  bear  witness  to 
the  truth;  and  in  so  doing  he  follows  the  example  of  Jesus. 

If  the  most  important  thing  in  the  social  organization 
were  the  perpetuation  of  the  present  custom  rather  than 
the  adaptation  of  the  organization  to  the  ideal  order  which 
as  yet  has  been  revealed  to  but  a  few,  the  conduct  of  the 
martyrs  would  have  been  as  abhorrent  to  God  as  it  was  to 
those  in  authority  in  the  days  when  they  suffered.  But 
that  does  not  seem  to  have  been  the  case.  They  seem  to 
have  been  blessed  by  God.  The  progress  of  mankind  has 
been  largely  due  to  "anarchists.''  It  is  they  who  have 
written  the  laws  under  which  we  now  live  in  security.  On 
the  banner  of  the  church  is  inscribed  the  device  which  we 
are  apt  to  think  has  only  an  historic  significance:  "The 
noble  army  of  martyrs  praise  thee."  Herein  lies  the  glory 
of  the  Reformation.  The  reformers  were,  some  of  them, 
martyrs,  and  some  only  "confessors";  but  they  were  all 
"anarchists"!  It  was  because  Germany  forgot  the  exam- 
ple of  the  fathers  that  they  made  the  state  the  supreme 
organism  and,  as  a  result,  individual  conscience  was  sub- 
merged in  the  great  tragedy. 

It  has  become  the  fashion  to  sneer  at  the  doctrine  of 
"private  judgment,"  which  indeed  is  open  to  many  objec- 
tions when  it  is  supposed  to  mean  that  one  man  is  as  well 
fitted  as  another  to  decide  technical  questions  with  which 
an  expert  only  has  the  necessary  knowledge  to  deal.  But 
when  it  is  denied  that  the  moral  life  is  dependent  uponjt, 
we  may  expect  again  an  "invasion  of  Belgium,"  or  the  re- 
establishment  of  the  Inquisition,  or  the  triumph  of  violent 
strikers.  No  organization  can  be  intrusted  with  the  re- 
sponsibility which  belongs  to  the  individual.*    "All  souls 

*  "The  moral  consciousness,  it  is  held,  is  simply  a  reflection  of  the 
social  order,  or  at  least  in  origin  it  was  so;  and  its  peculiarities  are  due 
to  its  origin.  .  .  .  The  theory  that  morality  consists  in  nothing  more 
than  conforming  to  the  social  order,  or  maintaining  the  social  equilib- 


ORGANIC  UNITY  77 

are  mine,"  said  the  prophet  of  the  exile,  speaking  for  the 
Eternal.  His,  like  Jeremiah^s,  was  a  nobler  teaching  than 
theirs  had  been,  who  knew  only  the  corporate  holiness  of 
Israel.  It  is  the  corner-stone  of  the  morality  of  Jesus,  and 
the  clearest  note  in  his  call  to  man  to  come  to  God.  In 
his  view  the  fate  of  the  ninety  and  nine,  considered  as  a 
flock,  was  not  to  weigh  for  a  moment  with  the  value  of  the 
individual  sheep.  St.  Paul  carried  on  the  teaching  of  his 
Master  when  he  wrote:  ^^ Every  one  of  us  shaU  give  account 
of  himself  unto  God."  We  cannot  shift  the  responsibility 
upon  state  or  church  or  union  or  any  other  group.  Each 
soul  stands  before  God  like  Adam  in  the  garden. 

It  may  be  objected  that  this  discussion  is  not  germane 
to  the  subject  in  hand.  But  a  moment's  consideration  will 
show  that  it  is  of  the  utmost  value  in  an  understanding  of 
the  problem  before  us.  Its  influence  upon  the  moral  char- 
acter cannot  be  too  strongly  insisted  upon.  The  Germans 
whose  ruthlessness  shocked  the  world  had  been  trained  to 
believe  that  the  state  was  the  supreme  organism,  and  as 
a  result  their  individual  conscience  played  no  part  in  the 
awful  tragedy. 

What,  then,  is  society  ?  It  is  the  necessary  association 
for  a  more  effective  and  nobler  life  than  is  possible  for  the 


rium,  or  promoting  social  vitality,  receives  no  support  from  the  histori- 
cal view  that,  for  the  conscience  of  the  early  or  savage  tribesman, 
morality  and  social  custom  had  the  same  content.  .  .  .  Conventional 
morality  simply  means  the  morality  of  ordinary  opinion,  which  is  in 
close  accord  with  prevailing  practice.  The  morality  of  primitive  man 
was  strictly  conventional ;  the  morality  of  civilized  man  is  often  conven- 
tional in  a  less  strict  sense  .  .  .  and  conventional  morality  may  be 
used  as  a  term  of  reproach  just  because  the  moral  opinion  of  men  is  no 
longer  restricted  to  opinions  that  are  exclusively  social  in  their  origin. 
But  the  form  of  morality  which  is  most  purely  conventional  is  that  in 
which  it  is  merely  social;  in  objecting  to  any  moral  doctrine  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  conventional,  the  objector  admits  by  implication  that 
the  social  basis  of  morality  is  inadequate,  and  that  it  stands  in  need  of 
reflective  criticism." — "Moral  Values  and  the  Idea  of  God,"  W.  R. 
Sorley,  pp.  65-68. 


78  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

individual  in  isolation.  "It  is  not  well  for  the  man  to  be 
alone." 

The  unit  is  the  individual.  He  does  not  exist  for  society 
nor  does  society  exist  for  him.  He  becomes  a  person  only 
in  society.  Society  is  the  name  for  all  the  personalities 
who  have  preceded  and  are  now  living  and  who  are  yet  to 
come.  Each  of  these  is  dependent  for  his  complete  per- 
sonality upon  all.  Society,  then,  is  not  a  person;  it  is  the 
necessary  condition  of  personality. 

It  is  due  to  a  confusion  upon  this  matter  that  the  hor- 
rors of  the  late  war  fell  upon  us.  But  it  is  no  new  thing. 
The  world  has  not  suddenly  grown  worse.  Indeed,  the 
horror  excited  by  the  war  is  a  proof  that  the  world  is  bet- 
ter. The  outrages  in  the  late  war  are  no  greater  than 
those  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War.  But  in  those  days  it  was 
assumed  that  such  things  were  inevitable.  To-day  they 
are  beUeved  to  be  preventable.  That  which  distinguishes 
this  age  from  any  other  is  that  we  have  tried  to  formulate 
a  philosophic  and  moral  justification  of  such  horrors.  This 
has  been  traced  to  German  philosophy  and  to  the  scientific 
writers  of  the  nineteenth  century.  But  these  justifications 
go  farther  back  than  that.  They  are  the  outcome  of  the 
mediaeval  theory  of  the  sin  of  heresy,  which  was  identified 
with  difference  of  opinion  and  rebellion  against  the  dogmas 
of  the  church  before  the  state  had  become  the  group  to 
which  it  was  believed  the  allegiance  of  men  was  primarily 
due.  It  was  the  church  which  taught  that  the  individual 
must  subordinate  his  intellectual  and  moral  Hfe  to  the 
organization.  As  long  as  the  life  of  the  individual  was 
subordinated  to  the  church,  both  intellectual  and  moral 
progress  were  obstructed.  This  does  not  imply  that  the 
papacy  and  monasticism  and  scholasticism  were  without 
value.  We  may  say  of  them  all,  as  St.  Paul  said  of  the 
"law,"  that  they  were  schoolmasters,  but  a  scholar  who 
never  graduates  degenerates  into  a  slave.  Each  of  these 
had  a  preparatory  value  in  the  education  of  mankind,  but 


ORGANIC  UNITY  79 

became  a  tyranny  because  it  was  not  recognized  that  "  one 
good  custom  *'  may  "  corrupt  the  world."  The  "saints "  con- 
tinually violated  their  humane  feelings  in  obedience  to  the 
supposed  necessities  of  the  church — the  supreme  organiza- 
tion— ^but  by  so  doing  they  violated  the  social  law  because 
they  violated  the  law  of  the  individual.  For  the  welfare 
of  the  community  is  as  dependent  upon  the  protection  of 
the  "inalienable  rights"  of  the  individual  as  upon  the 
preservation  of  the  present  prevailing  custom. 

The  hope  of  the  future  lies  in  an  inspiring  education 
which,  recognizing  the  supreme  value  of  personality,  will 
set  free  the  latent  personality  in  the  individuals  now  sub- 
merged in  some  "organization."  At  present  we  are  con- 
fused between  the  claims  of  two  theories  of  education;  the 
one,  which  we  might  call  the  Jesuit  theory,  would  crush 
individuality  as  an  evil  thing  and  subordinate  free  will  to 
obedience;  the  other,  which  is  the  utilitarian,  has  no  higher 
purpose  than  to  enable  the  individual  to  succeed  in  the 
struggle  for  existence.  The  one  would  destroy  the  person- 
ality and  the  other  society.  But  personality  is  not  abnor- 
mal individuality;  it  is  the  individual  life  realizing  itself  in 
an  inspired  community.  The  late  Prof.  Royce  taught  us 
that  there  are  two  instincts  which  determine  the  relation 
of  the  individual  to  society;  the  one  is  "imitation"  and  the 
other  "opposition."  "T/je  entire  process  of  conscious  edu- 
cation involves  the  deliberate  appeal  to  the  docility  of  those 
two  types  of  social  instincts.  For  whatever  else  we  teach 
to  a  social  being  we  teach  him  to  imitate.  And  whatever 
use  we  teach  him  to  make  of  his  social  limitations  in  his 
relation  with  other  men,  we  are  obliged  at  the  same  time 
to  teach  him  to  assert  himself,  in  some  sort  of  way,  in  con- 
trast with  his  fellows,  and  by  virtue  of  the  arts  which  he 
possesses."  * 

But  if  this  is  true  of  the  individual  in  isolation,  it  is 
equally  true  of  the  individual  in  voluntary  groups.  It  is 
*Royce*s  "Outlines  of  Psychology,"  p.  279. 


8o  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

in  these  religious  groups  which  we  call  " churches''  that 
man  exercises  the  noblest  art,  which  is  the  worship  of  God. 
Because  this  truth  is  ignored,  we  hear  vague  talk  about 
''herd  instinct,"  the  "state  as  an  organism,"  "the  social 
conscience,"  "mob  psychology,"  and  the  "national  con- 
sciousness." But  how  seldom  does  any  one  take  the 
trouble  to  tell  us  what  these  expressions  mean !  We  sus- 
pect they  are  mere  figures  of  speech.  Had  the  "herd  in- 
stinct" predominated,  there  would  have  been  no  progress. 
The  state  is  not  an  "organism,"  but  an  organization  or 
corporation.  The  popular  saying  that  corporations  have 
no  souls  is  often  interpreted  as  a  reproach  to  corporations, 
but,  properly  understood,  it  is  the  statement  of  a  psycho- 
logical fact;  corporations  would  have  souls  if  they  were 
persons.  There  can  be  no  social  conscience  apart  from  the 
conscience  of  the  individuals  who  constitute  society;  nor 
can  "mob  psychology"  mean  anything  but  the  psychology 
of  individuals  acting  under  abnormal  conditions,  and 
thereby  escaping  from  the  inhibitions  of  habit,  and  in  con- 
sequence becoming  peculiarly  susceptible  to  "suggestion." 
"National  consciousness"  is  the  consciousness  of  individ- 
uals of  their  national  relation,  with  all  the  responsibility 
and  glory  which  accompany  such  remembrance. 

To  assert  that  "unity"  is  the  one  thing  for  which  the 
nations  long  to-day  is  to  overlook  another  passion  even 
greater  among  the  small  nations,  and  that  is  "self-deter- 
mination." Not  till  the  latter  has  been  attained  can  there 
be  any  hope  of  an  internationalism  which  will  supplement 
the  present  rivalries  of  nationality.  The  same  is  true  of 
the  church.  Unity  is  indeed  the  crying  need  to-day — as 
it  has  ever  been — but  it  cannot  be  attained  until  there  is 
the  recognition  of  the  desire  of  all  the  churches  to  enjoy 
self-determination. 

The  harmony  of  these  two  conflicting  desires  is  the 
problem  before  religious  men  to-day.  How  is  it  to  be 
solved?    We  cannot  return  to  the  unity  of  mediaevalism 


ORGANIC  UNITY  8i 

without  the  emplo3mient  of  force;  we  cannot  rest  satisfied 
with  the  present  impotence  of  the  various  churches.  What 
path  is  left?  None  so  far  suggested  seems  to  me  to  be 
likely  to  solve  the  problem,  for  no  one  of  them  seems  to 
appreciate  the  necessity  of  recognizing  the  two  elements 
in  the  equation.  We  must  do  in  the  ecclesiastical  life 
what  our  fathers  did  in  the  political  Hfe  of  this  nation;  we 
must  blaze  a  new  path  into  the  wilderness.  We  must 
recognize  that  we  have  come  to  a  new  era  and  must  serve 
it  with  new  methods.  We  are  to-day  in  our  ecclesiastical 
life  in  a  time  not  unUke  that  in  our  political  life,  which 
John  Fiske  called  "the  critical  period  in  American  his- 
tory." Our  fathers  found  a  solution  for  the  political  prob- 
lem by  the  discovery  of  a  new  form  of  political  association, 
which  they  called  "federalism."  We  must  find  a  new 
form  of  religious  solidarity  which  will  protect  the  rights  of 
the  small  and  yet  make  more  effective  the  life  of  the 
whole.  But  the  first  step  cannot  be  taken  till  we  recog- 
nize that  there  can  be  no  return  to  the  past.  We  can 
return  neither  to  the  Catholicism  of  the  Middle  Ages  nor 
to  the  Protestantism  of  the  sixteenth  century.  The  one  is 
identified  with  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  and  the  other 
with  self-sufficient  nationalism;  the  one  does  indeed  hold 
a  certain  theory  of  "development,"  but  the  other  is  iden- 
tified with  a  servile  dogmatism  which  is  repugnant  to  the 
modem  mind.*  It  is  significant  that  no  one  of  the  mod- 
em protestants  against  the  tyranny  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
from  DolUnger  to  Tyrrell,  has  seemed  even  to  contemplate 
turning  to  Protestantism. 

*  "  I  would  say  that  the  least  valuable  part  of  the  inheritance  which 
modern  Christendom  owes  to  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century 
is  its  distinctive  dogmatic  theology,  which  was  in  truth  very  largely 
moulded  upon  the  traditions  and  ideas  of  mediaeval  scholasticism  in  its 
last  and  most  degenerate  phase.  From  one  point  of  view  "Lutheran 
doctrine  (of  justification  by  faith)  is  simply  the  last  and  not  the  best 
product  of  an  expiring  scholasticism." — "The  Idea  of  Atonement  in 
Christian  Theology,"  Dean  Rashdall,  p.  416. 


82  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

This  has  been  well  expressed  by  a  recent  writer:  "The 
Protestant  Revolution  was  by  no  means  a  complete  move- 
ment. The  sixteenth  century  saw  neither  its  beginning 
nor  its  end.  No  vital  movement  comes  to  an  end  at  a 
given  date,  but  continues  on  its  way,  transmuted  but  un- 
diminished, along  the  great  arteries  of  the  world.  Life  is 
a  fluid.  Its  horizons  are  always  being  extended.  Religion 
is  always  being  reformed.  Less  and  less  do  we  endeavor 
to  confine  it  within  the  shell  of  some  dogmatic  system. 
Instead,  we  seek  to  interweave  it  with  our  daily  lives. 
And  if  the  sixteenth  century  has  any  word  to  say  to  our 
own  it  is  that  any  attempt  to  harden  religion  into  an  in- 
stitution inevitably  results  only  in  sorrow,  in  suffering,  and 
in  failure.  Absolute  truth  lies  beyond  the  grasp  of  man. 
Man  must  be  content  to  increase  his  store  of  relative  truth 
with  the  changing  centuries.  We  are  abandoning  the  ideal 
of  immutable  truth  for  the  ideal  of  progressive  truth.  This 
is  an  imlooked-for  result  of  the  Protestant  Revolution  that 
is  slowly  but  surely  making  its  way  to  the  surface.  The 
deepest  significance  of  the  Revolution  lies  not  in  its  nega- 
tive element,  not  in  the  fact  that  it  gave  birth  to  new 
dogmas  and  organized  new  churches,  but  in  the  profound 
awakening  of  the  religious  sentiment  that  it  produced,  the 
desire  to  be  in  harmony  with  God  that  it  implanted  in  the 
hearts  of  man.  In  doing  this  it  exaggerates  the  dogmas  of 
original  sin,  grace,  and  predestination  to  such  a  point  as 
to  reduce  man  to  a  cipher.  The  rectification  of  his  error 
is  the  task  of  the  later  stages  of  the  movement.'*  * 

It  is  because  this  truth  has  been  overlooked  that  good 
men  of  different  temperaments  are  seeking  to  restore  the 
vanished  unity  of  the  church  by  attempts  to  return  to  a 
past  that  can  no  more  be  regained  than  the  snows  of  the 
winter  that  has  gone.  Those  who  by  temperament  are 
Protestant  think  that  there  can  be  a  revival  of  Protestant 

*  "Renaissance  and  Reformation,"  Edward  Maslin  Hulme,  Century 
Co.,  p.  370. 


ORGANIC  UNITY  83 

dogmatism,  and  those  who  call  themselves  Anglo-Catholics 
dream  of  the  restoration  of  the  stately  edifice  erected  in 
the  Middle  Ages.  Both  are  dreams,  neither  of  which  in 
the  day  in  which  we  live  is  greatly  needed  in  order  that  we 
may  do  the  work  to  which  we  have  been  called  in  this  our 
day  and  generation. 


CHAPTER  VII 
CHURCH  UNITY 

The  dogma  of  corporate  unity  when  it  is  applied  to  the 
life  of  the  church  is  called  church  unity.  There  is  a  tenta- 
tive form  of  this  doctrine  which  need  not  long  detain  us, 
because  it  is  superficial.  It  is  what  is  known  as  "the 
federation  of  the  churches."  It  is  an  earnest  and  well- 
meaning  attempt  to  lessen  the  unseemly  denominational 
rivalry  among  the  various  churches.  But  it  seems  to 
assume  the  permanent  value  of  the  dogmatic  conclusions 
of  the  Reformation  theology,  which  it  identifies  with 
"evangelicar*  truth.  This  leads  to  a  sort  of  historical 
provincialism  which  is  distasteful  to  not  a  few  students  of 
the  long  history  of  the  church.  Moreover,  in  its  attempts 
to  produce  harmony,  it  seems  to  overlook  the  principles 
for  which  the  various  churches  believe  they  stand,  and 
which  is  their  sole  justification  for  their  being.  We  gain 
nothing  by  crying  "Peace,  peace,"  when  there  is  no  peace. 
Then  its  very  name  is  unfortunate;  "federation"  is  a  politi- 
cal term  and  predicates  a  central  authority  to  which  the 
parts  must  submit.  But  who  that  has  studied  the  politi- 
cal history  of  this  country  in  the  last  seven  years  can  be 
in  doubt  as  to  the  fate  of  any  scheme  which  seems  even 
to  suggest  a  "supergovernment"! 

On  the  other  hand,  we  should  gladly  admit  that  it  is 
doing  good  work  in  bringing  together  the  representatives 
of  the  various  churches  so  as  to  produce  a  better  under- 
standing, and  in  establishment  of  "union  churches"  in 
scattered  communities,  especially  in  Canada,  where  sec- 
tarian rivalries  were  stifling  rehgion.  It  also  acts  as  a 
clearing-house,  and  keeps  the  various  churches  informed 
of  present  problems  in  order  that  they  may,  by  a  com- 

84 


CHURCH  UNITY  85 

bined  effort,  influence  public  opinion  so  as  to  prevent  un- 
desirable legislation  or  urge  much-needed  reforms. 

But  the  classic  example  of  plans  for  "church  unity"  is 
foimd  in  the  Anglican  communion.  For  the  past  twenty- 
five  years  good  and  devoted  men  have  sought  for  some 
bond  of  um'on.*  But  when  these  plans  are  critically  ex- 
amined, it  will  be  found  that  none  of  them  is  free  from  the 
heresy  of  confusing  "organic"  with  "corporate"  unity. 
Sooner  or  later  we  are  sure  to  come  upon  some  such  state- 
ment as  this:  "Inasmuch  as  the  church  is  an  organization, 
it  must  have  some  sort  of  government,  some  definite  teach- 
ing, and  some  form  of  worship."  As  each  of  the  many 
churches  in  this  land  has  continued  for  many  years  to  min- 
ister to  men  of  many  minds,  it  is  to  be  assumed  that  they 
have  all  been  helpful  in  the  highest  realm  of  the  spirit. 
But  when  we  ask  ourselves  how  the  different  churches  are 
to  be  united  into  one  common  body,  we  find  ourselves  con- 
fronted by  the  old  spectre  of  uniformity,  which  has  been 
the  obstacle  to  unity  from  the  days  of  Constantine.  Uni- 
formity may  have  been  necessary  in  the  day  when  nothing 
but  the  power  of  the  state  seemed  able  to  control  the  spirit 
of  disputation  which  was  tearing  the  church  to  pieces, 
which  is  what  the  picture  of  the  church  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury presents  to  us,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  it  is  either 
necessary  or  desirable  now. 

Yet  that  is  the  spectre  which  seems  to  haunt  many  in 
our  church  who  write  on  this  subject.  Bishop  Gore's  book 
on  "The  Ministry,"  as  well  as  Canon  Headlamps  Bampton 
lectures  on  "The  Church's  Doctrine  and  Reunion,"  though 
they  start  from  different  points  of  view,  and  though  the 
latter  is  written  in  a  more  liberal  spirit  than  the  former, 
both  come  in  their  conclusions  to  an  agreement  that  would 
not  have  been  expected.    This  is  due,  I  believe,  to  the  fact 

*  A  full  list  of  the  various  plans  which  have  been  formulated  by  the 
English  Church  and  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country  will  be  found 
in  the  Appendix  to  Bishop  Manning's  "The  Call  to  Unity." 


86  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE   CHURCHES 

that  both  are  victims  of  a  common  obsession — Catholic 
tradition.  Both,  believing  that  the  English  Church  has 
maintained  the  Catholic  tradition,  in  doctrine,  discipline, 
and  worship,  fail  to  imagine  a  unity  which  is  not  based  on 
these  lines.  It  is  true  that  Canon  Headlam  finds  an  earlier 
tradition,  but  when  he  comes  to  the  present  problem,  he 
seems  to  feel  that  the  Catholic  tradition  is  essential.  If, 
however,  we  examine  what  these  writers  call  the  Catholic 
tradition,  we  shall  find  it  is  essentially  a  Protestant  tradi- 
tion. Both  show  the  influence  of  the  Protestant  dogma  of 
private  judgment.  For,  unwilling  as  we  may  be  to  admit 
it,  the  crown  of  the  Catholic  tradition  is  the  papacy. 

Yet  seeing  that  rock  clearly  before  them,  the  good  ship 
Faith  and  Orders  was  steered  straight  toward  it,  with  a 
result  which  might  have  been  expected.  Indeed,  we  are 
incUned  to  think  that  the  object  was  simply,  as  the  lawyers 
say,  to  "go  on  record '*  as  wilHng  to  unite  with  any  church. 
However  that  may  have  been,  the  result  was  inevitable. 
The  Roman  Catholic  Church  said,  in  substance:  "You  are 
quite  right  in  saying  that  a  true  church  must  have  a  valid 
ministry,  a  proper  way  of  administering  the  sacraments, 
and  must  hold  the  Catholic  faith.  Very  well !  If  that  is 
what  you  are  looking  for,  come  into  the  communion  of  the 
Mother  Church  and  submit  to  the  Infallible  Church — the 
same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever." 

Then  they  turned  to  the  Eastern  church,  i.  e.,  the  Greek 
or  Russian.  The  Orientals  do  not  know  a  great  deal  about 
the  history  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  and  are  a 
little  imcertain  as  to  the  validity  of  its  orders,  and  what 
they  had  heard  about  the  Reformation  they  did  not  like; 
and,  therefore,  they  suggested  that  if  the  Anglicans  would 
change  the  Nicene  Creed  into  the  form  that  they  have 
always  used — which  is  the  right  one — and  would  get  rid  of 
some  of  the  effects  of  the  Reformation,  then  they  might 
talk  about  church  unity.  The  bishop  of  Harrisburg,  chair- 
man of  the  commission,  representing  the  Episcopal  Church, 


CHURCH  UNITY  87 

addressed  a  letter  to  them  stating  in  substance  that  those 
for  whom  he  spoke  greatly  regretted  much  that  had  hap- 
pened in  the  Reformation,  and  intimated  that  it  was  hoped 
that  they  would  free  themselves  from  its  blemishes.  The 
bishop  of  southern  Virginia  immediately  protested,  and  so 
the  attempt  to  bring  about  church  unity  between  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  and  the 
Greek  Church  led  to  new  disturbances.  As  the  first  reach 
toward  union  between  the  Anglican  and  the  Roman  Church 
encountered  shipwreck,  so  the  next  tack  came  near  produc- 
ing mutiny. 

What  else  was  to  have  been  expected?  In  the  Anglo- 
Eastern  Catholic  Concordat  it  was  proposed  that  relics 
and  icons  should  be  used  as  "adjuncts^'  in  religious  wor- 
ship; that  the  seven  sacraments  be  acknowledged,  and  the 
hope  expressed  that  the  Anglican  churches  would  soon  have 
a  special  service  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  for  "^ex- 
treme unction."  In  the  preliminary  statement  of  the 
American  Commission  we  read:  "We  have  been  informed 
from  time  to  time  that  the  Orthodox  Easterns  have  some 
difficulty  in  reconciling  certain  Protestant  aspects  of  our 
position  and  policy  with  full  and  genuine  orthodoxy — in 
particular  the  phraseology  of  our  Articles  of  Religion ^  the 
laxity  of  our  discipline  toward  certain  Protestant  errors,  and 
the  existence,  even  among  many  of  our  clergy,  of  opinions 
inconsistent  with  loyalty  to  the  Catholic  Faith  and  Order  J* 
(Italics  mine.)  Then  follows  an  apology  for  the  Reforma- 
tion in  which  such  expressions  as  these  are  found:  "The 
Prayer  Book  was  set  forth  embodying  the  Catholic  working 
system,  hut  in  forms  and  language  which  it  was  hoped  would 
retain  the  loyalty  of  those  impatient  souls"!  "Accord- 
ingly, our  discipline  has  always  been  tender  and  sympa- 
thetic in  that  direction,  and  we  are  indisposed  to  drive  out 
those  among  ourselves  who  fail  to  realize  the  fulness  of  their 
Catholic  heritage,  lest  we  alienate  Protestants  altogether  and 
thus  end  all  hope  of  winning  them.    This  policy  has  worked 


88  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

as  well  as  could  be  reasonably  expected."  (It  might  be 
suggested  that  it  could  not  reasonably  have  been  expected 
to  work  at  all.)  "Those  who  fully  and  loyally  adhere  to 
the  Prayer-Book  working-system  do  become  more  and 
more  consistently  Catholic;  and  every  loyalty  in  this  work- 
ing-system results  in  what  is  called  a  'Catholic  movement/ 
of  which  the  Tractarian  movement,  beginning  in  1833,  ^s 
an  example.  And  each  new  movement  of  this  kind  is  more 
gratifying  in  its  Catholic  results  than  its  predecessors. 
The  sum  of  the  matter  is  that  our  history  establishes  the 
Catholic  nature  and  tendency  of  our  position  and  system; 
and  the  seeming  lax  aspects  of  conditions  show  merely  that 
we  are  adhering  to  the  great  work  of  helping  Protestants 
to  recover  what  they  have  lost." 

There  are  two  things  to  be  said  about  this  remarkable 
document;  the  first  is  that  one  wonders  what  will  be  its 
effect  when  the  commission  on  "faith  and  orders"  comes 
to  conference  with  the  "impatient"  Protestants. 

The  second  is,  the  men  who  signed  this  report  are  aU 
good  men  and  some  of  them  learned  men;  moreover,  there 
must  have  been  some  with  a  sense  of  humor.  I  think  that 
the  latter  must  have  signed  without  reading  it. 

The  letter  of  the  bishop  of  southern  Virginia  is  pertinent: 

"...  I  have  the  highest  respect  for  the  members  of 
the  commission  and  recognize  their  ability  and  their  pure 
consecration  to  the  cause  of  Christian  unity.  In  both  the 
preliminary  statement  and  the  proposed  terms  of  agree- 
ment, however,  there  are  expressed  positions  which  I  can- 
not take  conscientiously  with  my  sense  of  loyalty  to  the 
church  of  which  I  am  a  member. 

"I  find  myself  unable  to  disagree  with  the  definition  and 
what  I  feel  to  be  the  limitation  of  the  number  of  sacraments 
given  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles  of  our  own  church. 

"I  cannot  join  in  the  apology,  which  is  made  in  the 
preliminary  statement  of  the  American  Commission  for  the 


CHURCH  UNITY  89 

English  Reformation,  nor  share  the  regret  expressed  for 
the  Protestant  atmosphere  in  which  the  Anglican  Church 
was  compelled  to  set  forth  its  liturgy  and  its  foundation  of 
doctrine.  Nor  can  I  share  in  the  hope  that  in  the  near 
future,  when  'the  Catholic  movement  of  which  the  Trac- 
tarian  movement  beginning  in  1833  ^s  an  example,'  has 
reached  its  zenith,  the  church  will  be  thoroughly  de-prot- 
estantized. Nor  am  I  ready  to  accept  the  decrees  of  the 
seventh  council  and  to  lend  my  sanction  to  the  worship  of 
relics  and  icons. 

"For  these  reasons  I  have  cabled  to  the  chairman  of  the 
commission  not  to  sign  my  name,  as  a  member  of  the 
commission,  to  either  the  preliminary  statement  or  the 
terms  of  agreement.  I  do  not  desire  to  enter  into  con- 
troversy. For  my  associates  on  the  commission  I  have  a 
feeling  of  affection  and  of  sympathy  in  their  desire  to  pro- 
mote Christian  unity.  Their  judgment  may  be  better 
than  mine,  but  I  am  compelled  to  follow  my  conviction 
and  do  my  duty  as  God  seems  by  His  Holy  Spirit  to  indi- 
cate it  to  me.  I  shall  reserve  the  right  to  express  my 
views,  as  a  member  of  the  commission,  when  its  report  is 
presented  to  the  General  Convention."  * 

But  a  more  august  and,  indeed,  more  hopeful  sign  was 
seen  in  the  attempt  of  the  Lambeth  Conference  to  approach 
the  non-Episcopal  churches  of  the  world.  The  letter  of 
the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  is  a  beautiful  letter;  it 
breathes  the  spirit  of  peace  and  love.  But  we  find  in  it 
the  same  fallacy  which  underlies  all  these  Anglo-Catholic 
appeals.  The  archbishop's  plan  of  unity  is  expressed  as 
follows:  "We  would  say  that  if  the  authorities  of  other 
communions  should  so  desire,  we  are  persuaded  that  the 
bishops  and  clergy  of  our  communion  would  willingly  con- 
sent to  accept  from  these  authorities  a  form  of  commission 
or  recognition  which  would  commend  our  ministry  to  their 
congregation.  It  is  our  hope  that  the  same  motive  would 
*$ee  Th^  Chronicle  of  September,  1920, 


90  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES      / 

lead  ministers  who  have  not  received  it  to  accept  a  com- 
mission through  Episcopal  ordination  as  obtaining  for 
them  a  ministry  throughout  the  fellowship.*'  The  answer 
of  the  non-Episcopal  clergy  is  in  substance:  "But  we  have 
always  allowed  your  ministers  to  come  into  our  pulpits. 
We  do  not  suggest  that  your  ministry  is  not  a  valid  one. 
But  what  you  are  really  asking  us  to  do  is  to  declare  that 
our  ministry  is  at  least  an  incomplete  ministry,  and  has 
never  been  under  the  highest  blessing  of  God.'' 

The  letter  of  the  archbishop,  which  was  hailed  as  the 
proclamation  of  peace  by  not  a  few  of  the  clergy  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  who  were  influenced  by  its  sincere  note 
of  love,  should  be  critically  examined.  It  cannot  lead  to 
unity  because  of  what  it  explicitly  states  and  implicitly 
suggests.  It  is  evident  that  there  is  no  equivalent  ex- 
change in  the  arrangement  suggested,  for  what  it  requires 
is  that  those  who  have  not  enjoyed  the  advantages  of 
Episcopal  ordination  shall,  before  being  permitted  to  min- 
ister in  Episcopal  churches,  be  ordained  by  a  bishop.  On 
the  one  hand,  a  license  is  to  be  issued  to  minister  in  a  par- 
ticular congregation,  and,  on  the  other,  an  ordination  is 
required  which  would  give  for  the  first  time  a  valid  min- 
istry in  the  universal  church. 

All  the  bishops  are  not  at  one  in  what  they  are  seek- 
ing. While  it  should  be  recognized  that  in  this  suggestion 
the  majority  of  the  bishops  were  animated  by  a  pure  mo- 
tive, the  language  of  the  letter  cannot  fail  to  excite  a  sus- 
picion that  there  is  something  implied  which  is  not  frankly 
expressed.  Inasmuch  as  the  letter  of  the  archbishop  re- 
ceived the  approval  of  almost  every  one  present  at  the 
Lambeth  Conference,  there  will  be  a  suspicion  that  it 
would  never  have  been  assented  to  by  some  of  the  Ameri- 
can bishops  had  it  not  been  that  they  believed  the  plan,  if 
accepted  by  the  non-Episcopal  churches,  would  lead  to  the 
eventual  abolishment  of  the  non-Episcopal  ministries,  and 
give  to  each  the  "succession"  mcUgre  lui.    The  truth  is 


CHURCH  UNITY  91 

that  the  whole  plan  shows  that  these  good  and  learned  men 
are  not  living  in  the  twentieth  century  at  all,  and  as  a  result 
there  is  an  air  of  unreality  about  the  whole  scheme  which 
vitiates  an  unquestioned  worthy  motive. 

What  better  reply  could  be  made  to  it  than  the  answer 
of  the  Rev.  Francis  G.  Peabody  ?  *  "What  seems  to  the 
bishops  an  open  road  confronts  the  great  majority  of  their 
Protestant  brethren  with  the  sign  'private  way.'  In  fact, 
the  movement  of  united  Protestantism  has  already  ad- 
vanced a  considerable  distance  in  quite  another  direction, 
toward  a  unity  of  spirit  and  a  religion  of  practical  disciple- 
ship  of  Jesus  Christ;  and  the  question  of  the  transmission 
of  the  Episcopate  already  appears  to  those  who  are  on  the 
way  to  this  spiritual  unity  to  belong  to  a  past  era,  when 
questions  of  ecclesiastical  authority  were  of  real  interest, 
and  the  world  had  not  been  summoned  to  the  weightier 
matters  of  co-operation,  sacrifice,  and  service." 

But  it  is  not  the  impracticability  of  the  plan  which  is 
so  distressing  as  the  confusion  which  it  reveals  in  the  minds 
of  the  representatives  of  the  Anglican  communion.  Are 
they  or  are  they  not  in  s)rmpathy  with  the  churches  of  the 
sixteenth  century  ?  They  cannot  have  it  both  ways.  The 
real  question  which  the  Episcopal  churches  must  face  and 
answer  before  they  can  speak  with  authority  to  their  reli- 
gious brethren  is  far  deeper  than  any  question  of  orders;  it 
goes  down  to  the  very  foimdation  of  religion  itself.  Does 
the  Episcopal  Church  believe  in  *' magical"  or  spiritual 
religion  ?  That  is  the  real  question.  The]  Roman  Catho- 
lic Church  does  believe  in  magical  religion.  The  Protestant 
churches  do  not.  Where  does  the  Anglican  Church  stand  ? 
The  world  has  a  right  to  know.  Do  its  leaders  know  ?  I 
am  inclined  to  believe  that  they  do  not.  They  are  by 
training  and  inheritance  free  men,  who  believe  in  a  desire 
to  die  in  the  "comfort  of  a  reasonable,  religious,  and  holy 
hope,"  but  at  the  same  time  they  are  drawn  to  a  magical 

*  See  tlje  Hibbert  Journal^  January,  192 1. 


92  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES       / 

religion  against  which  our  Saviour  was  the  first  Christian 
Protestant.*  Till  they  are  clear  in  their  own  minds  where 
they  stand  on  this  fundamental  question,  it  would  seem 
to  be  the  part  of  modesty  to  cease  these  suggestions  for 
church  unity  to  men  who  are  quite  clear  that  whatever 
may  be  the  advantage  of  the  Episcopate  as  a  working 
order,  or  the  glory  of  the  liturgy  as  an  expression  of  the 
church's  continuous  life,  or  of  doctrine  which  perpetuates 
the  faith  of  old,  if  the  result  is  that  men  are  "to  be  en- 
tangled again  in  the  yoke  of  bondage"  from  which  Christ 
has  set  them  free,  they  will  prefer  to  sacrifice  all  these 
treasures  of  historic  inheritance  in  order  to  rejoice  in  the 
liberty  of  the  children  of  God. 

There  is  to-day  a  crisis  which  menaces  all  the  churches, 
but  that  of  the  Episcopal  Church  is  the  most  acute.  When 
it  has  made  the  great  decision,  its  duty  will  be  plain — 
either  to  return  from  its  wanderings  to  the  mother  church 
and  admit  that  they  and  their  fathers  have  sinned  in  tear- 
ing the  seamless  robe  of  our  Lord,  or  else  say  plainly:  "We 
are  seeking  a  better  country  and  have  no  desire  to  return." 
Till  it  does  that  its  proclamations  will  have  but  academic 
interest,  and  the  world  is  in  too  dreadful  a  condition  to 
listen  to  unreal  and  futile  schemes  which  fail  to  imder- 
stand  the  signs  of  the  times.  This  has  been  bluntly  but 
none  too  blimtly  set  forth  by  the  outspoken  dean  of  St. 
PauFs: 

"We  do  not  sufficiently  realize  how  completely  the 
path  to  various  church  reforms  is  barred  by  those  who 
refuse  to  consent  to  any  change  which  would  be  an  obsta- 
cle in  the  way  of  submission  to  Rome.  ...  It  is  the 
ignis  fatuus  of  reunion  with  Rome  which  blocks  the  way 
to  reunion  with  our  Protestant  brethren.  And  I  maintain 
that  we  cannot  allow  the  road  to  be  permanently  blocked 
in  this  way.  We  may  think  it  right  to  exercise  patience 
for  the  sake  of  internal  peace;  but  we  must  push  steadily 
*  See  below,  Chapter  XV. 


CHURCH  UNITY  93 

against  this  absurd  barrier  till  it  breaks.  We  must  show 
by  actions  as  weU  as  by  words  that  we  do  not  unchurch 
our  brethren,  that  we  wish  to  acknowledge  them  and  the 
societies  to  which  they  belong.  I  repeat  that  it  is  recogni- 
tion, not  complete  fusion,  which  we  have  to  aim  at.  Let 
me  conclude  by  quoting  the  words  of  Field-Marshal  Lord 
Haig: 

"*Now  that  the  ordeal  of  war  is  over,  I  believe  that  the 
churches,  if  they  will  but  act  together,  have  a  great  and 
unequalled  opportunity  to  secure  and  preserve  for  all  time 
to  the  lasting  advantage  of  our  race  that  capacity  for  com- 
mon effort,  spirit  of  fellowship,  and  community  of  ideals 
which  by  their  teaching  and  example  they  did  so  much  to 
foster  in  the  war.*"  * 

*  See  The  Churchman,  March  5,  1921. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
SPIRITUAL  UNITY 

If  what  has  been  said  in  the  foregoing  chapters  be  true, 
then  there  inevitably  follow  certain  conclusions  which  must 
affect  our  thought  of  Christian  unity,  and  also  the  steps 
which  should  be  taken  to  effect  it.  There  can  be  no  unity 
between  organizations.  Unity  is  a  spiritual  experience 
and  can  be  nothing  less  than  the  unity  of  persons.  If  the 
various  churches  are  persons,  they  may  unite  in  a  spiritual 
entity;  if  they  be  not  persons,  they  cannot  so  unite. 
Unity,  then,  if  it  is  ever  to  be  attained,  must  be  the  unity 
among  those  individuals  who  are  associated  together  in 
the  various  groups  which  we  call  churches — Episcopal, 
Presbyterian,  Baptist,  Methodist — ^what  you  will.  The 
recognition  of  this  truth  might  lead  us  to  realize  the  unity 
which  now  exists,  rather  than  to  seek  means  for  bringing 
about  a  unity  which  never  did  and,  indeed,  never  can  exist. 
This  will  not  readily  be  admitted;  it  may  be  said  that  "as 
there  is  unity  among  states,  so  may  there  be  unity  among 
churches.  Our  own  federal  union  is  an  example  of  that 
which  seems  here  to  have  been  denied."  But  it  was  a 
true  instinct  which  led  the  framers  of  the  Constitution  to 
begin  with  the  statement:  "We,  the  people  of  these  United 
States."  It  was  the  individual  citizens  who  could  unite 
and  not  the  "States."  The  same  is  true  of  the  church. 
The  various  churches  cannot  unite,  though  they  may  co- 
operate and  associate  themselves  for  more  effective  work. 
"Ye,"  says  St.  Paul,  "are  the  body  of  Christ  and  members 
in  particular." 

If  church  unity  is  an  impossibility  as  at  present  con- 
ceived, and  yet  it  is  evident  that  without  some  closer 
association  the  churches  are  impotent,  what  remains?    I 

94y 


SPIRITUAL  UNITY  95 

answer:  Fellowship.  Whether  there  can  be  such  an  asso- 
ciation of  the  churches  as  would  reveal  a  complete  manifes- 
tation of  the  indwelling  spirit  of  God,  which  is  really  the 
desire  of  many  earnest  men,  we  need  not  now  consider. 
It  would  be  largely  in  the  nature  of  prophecy,  to  which  we 
do  not  pretend.  This,  however,  will,  I  believe,  be  acknowl- 
edged by  all  reasonable  men,  that  any  such  association  must 
be  preceded  by  a  spiritual  unity,  which  is  what  we  mean 
by  fellowship. 

The  pathway  to  fellowship  is  in  some  respects  the  same 
as  that  which  the  "Catholic'^  so  much  insists  upon.  It  is 
the  path  which  has  already  been  traced  by  the  feet  of  the 
saints  of  old.  It  is  also  in  harmony  with  the  devout  spirit 
of  the  "Protestant,''  who  insists  that  the  appeal  to  history 
shall  be  carried  back  to  the  beginning  of  the  history  of  the 
church,  when  the  influence  of  Jesus  was  predominant  in 
the  Uves  of  his  disciples. 

Let  us  begin  with  the  first.  The  Catholic  who  affirms 
that  no  progress  is  possible  for  those  who  overlook  the  fact 
that  there  was  once  a  single  church,  and  that  in  the  New 
Testament  it  is  stated  in  terms  which  cannot  be  mistaken 
that  there  can  by  no  possibility  be  more  than  one,  is,  I 
believe,  on  sure  ground.  "There  is  one  body,  and  one 
spirit,  even  as  ye  are  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling;  one 
Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all, 
who  is  above  all,  and  through  all,  and  in  you  all.''  Noth- 
ing can  be  clearer  than  that  there  can  be  but  one  church. 
But  when  we  ask  ourselves  with  which  of  the  existing  eccle- 
siastical organizations  this  one  church  is  to  be  identified, 
our  difficulties  begin.  Has  any  one  of  the  churches  suc- 
ceeded in  emancipating  itself  wholly  from  the  mediseval 
spirit?  It  is  to  be  doubted.  Now,  one  characteristic  of 
tJie  mediaeval  mind  was  that  it  began  with  a  dogma,  and 
then  sought  for  facts  to  buttress  it.  If  we  have  deter- 
mined that  the  church  shall  have  certain  characteristics  or 
"notes"  and  none  other,  then  inevitably  we  shall  be  led 


96  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

to  identify  the  "one  church"  with  that  body  which  seems 
to  us  to  be  the  manifestation  of  those  characteristics  or  to 
strike  those  "notes/*  We  then  forget  that  St.  Paul,  in  his 
exposition  of  the  one  church,  was  careful  to  point  out  that 
diversity  was  an  essential  characteristic  of  the  one  church. 
"Unto  every  one  of  us  is  given  grace  according  to  the 
measure  of  the  gift  of  Christ."  It  is  the  spirit  of  Christ 
which  determines  the  identity  of  any  group  with  the  true 
church.  Can  it  be  said  that  any  one  of  the  existing 
churches  has  a  monopoly  of  that  spirit  ?  If  instead  of  the 
mediaeval  spirit  we  were  to  seek  for  the  solution  of  our 
problem  in  the  scientific  spirit  which  has  led  to  such  mar- 
vellous results  in  other  departments  of  life,  we  might  come 
to  a  better  knowledge  of  the  truth  in  this  one. 

St.  John  says:  "If  we  walk  in  the  light,  as  God  is  in  the 
light,  we  have  fellowship  one  with  another."  It  would 
seem  then  as  if  he  identified  the  brotherhood  with  those 
who  are  walking  in  the  light.  He  tells  us  that  light  is  the 
atmosphere  in  which  God  lives;  something  purer  than  that 
of  ordinary  life.  Whoever,  then,  enters  into  that  rarefied 
atmosphere  of  the  divine  life  becomes  one  of  the  brother- 
hood. 

But  it  means  more  than  that.  The  word  "light,"  as  it 
is  used  in  the  New  Testament,  means  ethical  goodness. 
If  the  Christian  life  is  not  an  ethical  life,  then  it  is  a  vain 
speculation.  Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  not  one  of 
the  churches  which  has  not  been  tempted,  and  sometimes 
yielded  to  the  temptation,  to  place  something  rather  than 
ethical  goodness  as  the  goal  of  human  endeavor.  It  may 
have  been  the  reception  of  the  sacraments,  submission  to 
authority,  or  the  expression  of  an  orthodox  faith;  but  the 
only  value  in  all  these  is  that  they  may  be  means  to  an 
end,  which  end  is  ethical  goodness.  If  anything  is  ever 
set  up  in  place  of  that,  then  we  walk  in  darkness,  and  not 
in  light.  It  is  a  lamentable  fact  that,  because  of  the  eccle- 
siastical and  theological  idols  to  which  we  have  turned, 


SPIRITUAL  UNITY  97 

the  Christian  church  has,  in  some  respects,  lost  something 
of  the  ethical  life  known  to  paganism  before  the  preaching 
of  the  gospel.  This  is  the  dark  shadow  cast  by  the  light 
of  "justification  by  faith."  Belief  or  mere  assent  has 
sometimes  been  substituted  for  moral  goodness. 

"Light"  means  more  than  moral  goodness;  it  means 
also  knowledge — specially  the  knowledge  of  God.  "  Light " 
is  the  manifestation  of  the  unseen,  and  that  means  that 
the  divine  light  is  the  manifestation  of  the  divine  nature, 
which  is  ultimate  reality  or  truth.  Those,  then,  who  walk 
in  the  light  are  walking  in  the  atmosphere  of  God,  and  are 
receiving,  by  direct  personal  revelation,  truth  or  the  ulti- 
mate reality.*  Bearing  these  truths  in  mind,  let  any  man 
ask  himself  this  question:  Is  there  any  one  of  the  churches 
which  can  claim  perfectly  to  represent  the  moral  life  or  to 
reveal  the  full  knowledge  of  God  ?  The  question  has  only 
to  be  asked  to  be  answered  in  regard  to  the  first:  there  are 
churches  which  claim  to  have  and  to  reveal  the  full  knowl- 
edge of  God,  but  a  history  of  the  church  will  show  that  the 
claim  is  not  justified. 

Let  the  question  now  be  turned  the  other  way:  Is  there 
a  single  one  of  the  many  churches  in  which  there  will  not 
be  foxmd  members  who  are  leading  a  noble  moral  life  or 
are  without  that  knowledge  of  God  which  enables  them  to 
call  him  Father,  Redeemer,  Sanctifier  ?  If  such  a  church 
can  be  found,  then,  indeed,  we  may  say  that  it  is  not  a 
church  nor  any  part  of  the  Church  of  the  Living  God. 

"Light"  means  also  love;  "God  is  light"  because  "God 
is  love."  Light  is  the  manifestation,  the  epiphany,  of  love. 
Is  there  any  church  which  has  a  monopoly  of  that?  Is 
there  any  church  some  of  whose  members  are  not  inspired 
by  love,  and  do  not  manifest  that  love  in  good-will  to  man 
and  in  deep  and  awful  gratitude  to  God  ?  Again  we  may 
say  that  to  these  questions  there  can  be  but  one  answer. 
But  the  right  answer  to  these  questions  would  enable  us 
•  See  "The  Fourth  Gospel,"  E.  F.  Scott,  pp.  255-256. 


98  THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

to  answer  our  previous  question :  "What  is  the  one  church  ? " 
The  one  church  is  the  brotherhood.  It  is  not  to  be  identi- 
fied exclusively  with  this  church  or  that  one ;  it  is  the 
"blessed  company  of  all  faithful  people/* 

This,  one  would  think,  should  be  a  truism.  But,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  it  is  a  truth  that  has  been  long  ignored. 
But  were  it  recognized,  it  would  be  seen  that  the  problem 
before  the  churches  to-day  is  not  at  all  what  it  has  been 
assumed  to  be,  viz.:  "How  shall  we  attain  church  unity  ?" 
The  real  problem  is:  "How  is  the  spiritual  unity  of  the 
brotherhood,  which  already  exists,  to  be  made  more  effec- 
tive in  the  life  of  the  world  ?" 

There  are  men  who  find  any  spiritual  fact  difficult  to 
grasp;  they  "seek  after  a  sign."  Such  men  will  say:  "This 
may  be  a  partial  truth,  but  what,  then,  becomes  of  the 
'visible'  church  of  God?"  It  might  be  answered  that  if 
the  "visible"  church  existed,  it  could  not  be  visible.  It 
would  still  be  an  ideal  to  which  any  group  of  the  one  church 
would  bear  witness.  When  the  devout  Catholic  enters  into 
any  little  chapel  of  his  faith,  he  has  a  sample  of  what  he 
beheves  to  be  the  true  church.  He  certainly  cannot  see 
the  whole  body.  Well,  why  can  we  not  see  in  any  com- 
pany gathered  together  in  Christ's  name  the  "communion 
of  saints"  ?  The  colors  of  the  rainbow  may  be  seen  in  one 
drop  of  water  depending  from  a  leaf  as  well  as  in  the  arc 
which  spans  the  firmament. 

Let  us  turn  back  to  the  example  of  Jesus,  for  in  his  hand 
we  may  find  a  clew  to  the  labyrinth.  When  he  went  up  to 
Jerusalem,  we  assume  that  he  saw  a  unity  such  as  some 
would  Hke  to  see  to-day,  but  the  fact  was  quite  different. 

When  our  Saviour  was  on  earth  the  rule  in  Palestine  was 
that  any  ten  Jews  might  establish  a  synagogue;  and  there 
were  many  synagogues  in  Jerusalem  itself.  The  "visible" 
Jewish  Church  had  succeeded  after  a  long  struggle  in 
establishing  the  one  altar  at  Jerusalem — the  sign  of  the 
unity  of  the  "visible"  church— but  the  "invisible"  church 


SPIRITUAL  UNITY  99 

was  nourished  in  the  synagogues,  with  their  wide  diversity 
of  opinion.  Against  the  former,  St.  John  tells  us,*  Jesus 
uttered  an  emphatic  protest.  But  against  the  latter  there 
is  no  record  of  any  word  of  disapproval.  The  reason  for 
that  is  doubtless  due  to  the  fact  that  he  recognized  that 
the  "unity  of  the  Jewish  people  was  not  in  opinion  but  in 
conduct."  t  That  was  the  original  unity  of  the  disciples. 
As  to  the  Jews,  the  law  was  the  ideal  which  bound  them 
together  and  manifested  itself  in  life  or  conduct,  so  the 
bond  that  held  the  early  disciples  together  was  the  love  of 
Jesus,  which  manifested  itself  in  newness  of  life.  Because 
this  is  true,  it  follows  that  there  was  Christian  unity  before 
there  was  church  unity  I  The  unity  of  the  Apostolic  Church, 
which  is  described  in  Acts,  is  the  same  unity  which  bound 
together  Peter  and  James  and  John,  while  Jesus  was  with 
them.  And  it  continued  for  a  hundred  years,  as  the  keen 
eye  of  Gibbon  discerned.  "It  has  been  remarked  with 
more  ingenuity  than  truth  that  the  virgin  purity  of  the 
church  was  never  violated  by  schism  or  heresy  before  the 
time  of  Trajan  or  Hadrian,  about  a  hundred  years  after 
the  death  of  Christ.  We  may  observe  with  more  propriety 
that  during  that  period  the  disciples  of  the  Messiah  were 
indulged  in  a  freer  latitude  both  of  faith  and  practice  than 
has  ever  been  allowed  in  succeeding  ages."  J 

Our  Saviour's  words  on  this  subject  are  often  quoted, 
but  I  am  sure  that  I  do  not  speak  for  myself  alone  when  I 
say  that  it  is  with  a  feeling  of  shock  that  I  hear  them 
quoted!  How  often  are  we  told  that  our  Saviour's  last 
prayer  was  "  that  they  all  may  be  one  "  ?  But  how  seldom 
is  the  saying  completed!  "As  thou,  Father,  art  in  me 
and  I  in  thee,  that  they  all  may  be  one  in  us."  That  is 
the  unity  which  will  convince  ^e  world  that  the  Father 
sent  him.    This  is  a  prayer  for  imity.     But  what  sort  of 

*  John  4  :  1^24. 

t  "Landmarks  of  Early  Christianity,"  Kirsopp  Lake,  pp.  39-40. 

t Gibbon's  "Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,"  chap.  XV. 


loo        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

unity  was  it  for  which  our  Lord  prayed?  The  answer 
that  is  usually  given  is  that  it  is  "organic"  unity.  But 
often  that  is  confused  with  physical  or  mechanical  or  cor- 
porate unity !  *  What,  then,  is  the  unity  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son  which  our  Lord  wished  the  disciples  to  ex- 
perience ?  In  theological  language,  it  is  unity  in  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  Father  and  the  Son  are  not  one  "person" 
but  two  "persons"  in  one  "substance."  Is  that  "sub- 
stance" physical,  so  that  it  may  be  spoken  or  thought  of 
as  one  body?  It  must  be,  if  the  analogy  which  it  is 
sought  to  establish  is  to  be  complete.  We  believe  that 
"substance"  to  be  spirit.  So  must  our  imity  be  unless 
we  are  willing  to  be  content  with  something  less  than  that 
for  which  our  Saviour  prayed. 

It  is  sometimes  said  that  this  leads  to  the  "invisible" 
church,  while  what  we  seek  is  the  "visible"  church.  "Our 
Lord  prayed  for  a  church  which  the  world  could  see  and 
therefore  believe  that  God  had  sent  him."  Is,  then,  the 
unity  of  God  visible  ?  Is  it  physical,  mechanical,  or  cor- 
porate? We  must  answer  that  it  is  spiritual.  It  is  not 
visible,  but  it  is  effective. 

It  is  a  sad  fact  that  we  must  step  outside  of  the  churches 
as  they  are  to-day  if  we  would  understand  what  the  unity 
of  the  spirit  really  is.  In  the  family,  in  business,  in  daily 
intercourse  of  neighbors,  in  hours  of  deep  distress  and  in 
days  of  national  danger,  men  whom  the  churches  divide 
realize  a  true  unity  of  the  spirit,  and  have  fellowship  one 
with  another.  This  was  the  unity  for  which  we  believe 
our  Saviour  prayed,  and  the  unity  which  the  imperialistic 
church  substituted  for  it  was  the  unity  of  the  kingdom  of 
this  world,  which  can  be  maintained  only  by  force. 

To  deny  that,  in  spite  of  the  sins  and  failures  of  the 

churches,  unity  does  exist,  or  that  when  it  manifests  itself 

the  world  does  recognize  that  it  is  divine,  or  to  say  that  it 

did  exist  for  a  little  while  in  the  "undivided"  church  but 

*  See  above,  Chapter  VI. 


SPIRITUAL  UNITl':  •'  V  .      '...'  i'loi 

has  not  been  seen  on  this  earth  forx^iiii6s,*isf  k\6t^^iul 
thought,  and  will  not  be  entertained  by  any  man  who  seri- 
ously considers  to  what  it  leads.  If  we  were  thankfully  to 
acknowledge  the  unity  we  have,  we  might  find  a  way  to 
make  it  more  effective  than  it  is. 

I  know  that  to  some  this  will  seem  mere  sentiment. 
But  nothing  could  be  farther  from  the  truth.  A  mere  sen- 
timent is  a  superficial  sensation.  This  is  a  sublime  spiri- 
tual fact.  It  is  the  very  unity  of  God  himself.  It  is  the 
joy  of  the  Son  to  do  the  Father's  will.*  Such  faith  had 
Jesus  in  the  wisdom  and  love  of  the  Father  that  no  sorrow 
or  pain  made  that  burden  too  heavy  to  bear.  The  cross 
itself  became  a  Joy,  for  by  it  he  believed  the  will  of  the 
Father  was  being  accompUshed.  And  the  joy  of  the 
Father  was  bound  up  with  that  of  the  Son;  he  was  "sat- 
isfied.'* The  Father's  heart  asked  nothing  more  of  his 
child  than  this  perfect  submission  to  his  righteous  will, 
even  when,  as  He  knew,  that  will  would  seem  to  be  the 
hatred  of  the  Son:  even  when  the  agony  seemed  to  be  the 
sign  that  the  Father  had  forsaken  him !  If  two  or  three 
are  gathered  together  in  that  "name,"  that  is,  in  that 
spirit,  of  trust  and  joy,  Christ  is  with  them,  and  where 
Christ  is,  there  is  the  church.  Each  of  these  individuals 
has  his  own  peculiar  view,  and  as  a  result  his  reaction  to 
the  divine  influence  will  be  different  from  that  of  any 
other  individual,  but  these  differences  of  temperament  can- 
not divide  those  who  have  the  "unity  of  the  spirit."  The 
story  that  is  told  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  a  beautiful 
and  moving  one.  Under  the  influence  of  a  great  and  awful 
sorrow,  and  inspired  by  a  glorious  hope,  that  little  com- 
pany of  men  and  women  were,  as  we  are  told,  of  "one 
heart  and  one  mind,"  praising  God.f  That  was  fellow- 
ship. But  as  the  numbers  increased  they  naturally  and 
properly  assembled  together  in  convenient  groups,  and 

*See  "Theologic  Definitions,"  Frederic  Palmer, 
t  Acts  2:  42-47. 


I02         THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

tltea  eac^  ^^o\ip  begsyti  tti>  claim  for  itself  peculiar  privileges 
and  advantages.  We  do  not  have  to  go  out  of  the  New 
Testament  for  that.  We  turn  to  the  Epistles  to  the  Corin- 
thians,* and  find  Paul  lamenting  that  there  were  some  who 
declared  that  they  were  the  Church  of  Peter,  and  others 
that  they  held  to  the  rigid  puritanism  of  James,  others  so 
fascinated  by  the  eloquence  of  Apollos  that  they  would 
listen  to  no  one  else,  and  some  were  so  devoted  to  Paul 
that  they  called  themselves  by  the  name  of  Paul,  and  there 
were  others  who  said  that  they  alone  were  the  true  disciples 
of  Christ.  To  all  these  Paul  said:  ^'Is  Christ  divided? 
Has  any  one  died  for  you  but  Christ?'*  The  unity  is  to 
be  found  in  the  atmosphere  of  God  and  in  loyalty  to  Jesus 
Christ,  and  not  in  any  ecclesiastical  arrangements:  "Ye 
were  called  unto  the  fellowship  of  his  Son  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord.'' 

But  when  the  church  grew  still  larger  and  passed  into 
the  atmosphere  of  the  Roman  Empire,  and  was  hypno- 
tized by  the  great  state,  which  with  all  its  divisions  still 
manifested  unity  in  the  emperor,  then  we  find  that  the 
quest  for  unity  soon  took  the  form  of  uniformity  in  disci- 
pline and  in  doctrine,  and  as  a  result  Arian  began  to  perse- 
cute Catholic,  and  Catholic  in  turn,  when  the  power  came, 
to  persecute  Arian;  the  East  broke  from  the  West  with 
awful  anathemas;  then  Franciscan  and  Dominican,  Jesuit 
and  Port  Royalist,  Catholic  and  Protestant,  Lutheran  and 
Zwinglian,  Calvinist  and  Socinian,  Churchman  and  Puri- 
tan, Puritan  and  Anabaptist,  generation  after  generation 
the  awful  strife  went  on,  until  the  whole  of  Europe  was 
deluged  with  blood  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War. 

"Love  your  enemy,  bless  your  haters,  said  the  Greatest  of  the 
great; 
Christian  love  among  the  churches  look'd  the  twin  of  heathen 
hate." 

*I  Cor.  1:9-13- 


SPIRITUAL  UNITY  103 

Then  at  last  the  state  stepped  in  and  said  the  vendetta 
must  cease,  and  Lockers  philosophy  of  toleration  passed 
over  into  the  churches.  But,  alas!  the  long  history  had 
left  its  influence  upon  men*s  thought,  and  toleration  soon 
degenerated  into  indifference  and  contempt,  and  the  result 
is  what  we  see  in  the  religious  life  of  the  churches  to-day. 
The  exclusive  spirit  which  prevents  fellowship  is  the  scan- 
dal of  our  religion. 

"Is  that  all ?"  it  may  be  asked.  "We  read  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  that  the  disciples  not  only  'continued  in 
the  Apostles'  fellowship'  but  also  in  their  doctrine';  does 
not  that  imply  that  there  must  be  some  definite  doctrine 
upon  which  all  must  be  agreed  ?"  There  must  indeed  be 
some  "doctrine":  man  is  an  intellectual  being,  and  his 
mind,  as  well  as  his  heart,  must  be  in  unity  with  God,  and 
so  in  unity  with  those  who  feel  God's  presence.  But  to 
say  that  the  doctrine  must  be  expressed  in  some  particular 
form  which  cannot  be  changed  is  to  affirm  that  the  mind 
of  man  is  incapable  of  progress.  It  is  just  because  it  did 
progress  that  the  creeds  were  formulated.  But  before  we 
consider  those,  would  it  not  be  well  for  us  to  ask  ourselves 
what  this  doctrine  was  in  which  the  early  disciples  con- 
tinued steadfast?  It  was  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah 
promised  by  the  prophets  of  old.  That  was  the  fact  upon 
which  they  were  all  agreed.  Are  not  all  Christians  agreed 
upon  that  ?  Not,  perhaps,  in  the  same  way  in  which  the 
Jewish  Christians  were,  but  in  a  deeper  sense.  Do  not  all 
believe  that  Jesus  is  the  "end  of  the  law".?  Do  not  all 
believe  that  the  "spirit  of  the  Lord  was  upon  him  and  that 
he  was  anointed  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the  poor,  to  give 
sight  to  the  blind,  to  bind  up  the  broken-hearted,  to  set 
at  liberty  them  that  are  bound,  and  to  proclaim  the  accept- 
able year  of  the  Lord"  ?  There  has  never  been  any  devi- 
ation from  that  early  apostolic  doctrine.*    They  continued, 

*  It  is  to  be  remembered  that  we  are  speaking  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
early  disciples,  and  not  of  its  later  development  under  the  influence  of 
Paul  and  John. 


I04        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

also,  we  are  told,  in  "the  breaking  of  bread."  If  we  inter- 
pret that,  as  we  probably  should  do,  as  the  Lord's  Supper, 
is  it  not  true  that  all  the  churches  continue  in  that  ?  Some 
more  frequently  than  others,  some  with  greater  ceremonial 
than  others,  some  with  theories  which  others  repudiate, 
but  the  fact  remains  that  aU  the  churches  do  continue  to 
commemorate  the  death  of  the  Saviour  in  the  way  they 
believe  the  Lord  commanded.  The  early  Christians  also 
"continued  in  prayer."  Need  that  be  amplified  ?  Are  we 
not  aU  of  every  name  agreed  that  the  communion  of  the 
disciples  with  God  in  prayer  is  of  the  essence  of  the  religion 
of  Jesus  ^ 

I  see  no  sign  that  the  spiritual  unity  of  the  church  has 
been  broken.  What  I  do  see  is  that  another  sort  of  imity 
has  been  substituted  for  the  original  one,  and  that  because 
of  that  the  rivalries  of  the  churches  have  been  increased. 
I  think  the  time  has  come  when  we  should  ask  ourselves 
whether  a  more  spiritual  union  should  not  be  sought. 

To  attain  that  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  cease  to 
read  into  the  story  that  which  was  not  there  at  the  begin- 
ning. We  must  not  say  that  "fellowship"  means  disci- 
pline, nor  that  "doctrine"  means  the  CathoUc  creeds,  nor 
that  the  "breaking  of  bread"  means  a  sacrifice  offered  by 
a  priest,  nor  "prayers"  a  liturgy.  But  inasmuch  as  we 
neither  can  nor  should  desire  to  return  to  that  primitive 
age,  and  therefore  cannot  restore  that  early  expression  of 
unity,  it  follows  that  we  should  seek  for  some  way  of  ex- 
pressing our  common  fellowship,  doctrine,  communion,  and 
worship.  But  as  we  cannot  return  to  the  apostolic  days 
and  manner,  neither  should  we  insist  upon  returning  to 
any  particular  age  which  may  most  strongly  appeal  to  us. 
We  have  a  great  history,  and  none  of  it  should  be  lost. 
The  customs  which  have  been  helpful  should  be  continued 
as  long  as  they  remain  helpful,  but  they  need  not  be  a 
hindrance  to  spiritual  unity. 

The  mistake  of  the  extreme  individualist  is  that  he  in- 


SPIRITUAL  UNITY  105 

sists  that  the  individual  is  at  liberty  to  ^'join  the  church*' 
or  not  as  he  sees  fit.  The  truer  statement  would  be  that 
the  individual  is  at  liberty  to  choose  the  particular  kind  of 
church  he  will  join,  but  of  some  church  he  must  be  a  mem- 
ber, not  because  he  will  "go  to  heU''  if  he  does  not,  but 
because  unless  he  is  in  communion  with  some  company  of 
Christ's  disciples  he  cannot  develop  the  highest  spiritual 
life  of  which  he  is  capable.  Thus  the  old  saying,  ^^  Extra 
ecclesiam  nulla  salus'^  is  true,  though  the  prevalent  inter- 
pretation which  would  substitute  some  particular  church 
makes  it  false.  That  mankind  should  be  organized  both 
politically  and  religiously  is  necessary,  but  the  particular 
form  which  either  organization  takes  will  depend  upon  the 
time  and  place  and  intellectual  condition  of  the  individuals 
who  constitute  the  association.  That  must  be  decided  by 
the  free  activity  of  the  individuals  who  are  most  intimately 
concerned. 

Doubtless  it  will  be  objected  that  this  truth  does  not 
need  to  be  emphasized  in  this  country;  that  it  has  been 
carried  to  such  an  extent  that  there  is  danger  of  the  dis- 
solution of  every  ecclesiastical  bond.  All  this  may  be  ad- 
mitted; yet,  having  won  the  battle  for  private  judgment, 
there  is  need  of  ceaseless  vigilance  lest  we  be  caught  by 
the  heresy  which  would  lead  us  back  into  the  bondage 
from  which  our  fathers  escaped.  It  is  not  by  denying 
private  judgment  and  the  results  which  must  inevitably 
follow,  but  by  the  fulfilment  of  its  obligations,  that  peace 
and  prosperity  are  to  be  found.  The  problem  to-day  is  to 
manifest  the  existing  unity  so  as  to  protect  the  inalienable 
rights  of  the  individual  and  at  the  same  time  make  the 
corporate  activities  of  the  whole  company  effective.* 

*  "  Christ's  people,  in  the  power  of  his  spirit,  will  give  effect  to  his 
message  and  vindicate  its  truth  and  value.  The  world  which  had 
rejected  and  condemned  him  in  his  own  lifetime  will  be  compelled  to 
reverse  its  judgment  when  it  witnesses  the  marvellous  work  of  his 
spirit  within  his  church.  Paul,  in  his  discussion  of  the  comparative 
value  of  the  different  spiritual  gifts,  expresses  in  a  simpler  form  the 


io6        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE   CHURCHES 

Let  us  turn,  then,  to  the  figures  of  speech  employed  by 
Jesus  to  express  his  conception  of  the  spiritual  community. 
He  did  not  take  the  state  as  his  model  nor,  like  some  to- 
day, call  his  disciples  an  army;  he  spoke  of  them  as  a 
family,  as  a  flock,  and  as  the  free  citizens  of  his  Father's 
kingdom.  They  were  a  family  because  they  were  united 
in  the  spirit  of  brotherhood;  they  were  a  flock  because  they 
followed  the  Good  Shepherd;  they  were  the  citizens  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  because  the  passion  of  their  lives  was  to 
do  the  will  of  their  Father  in  heaven.  This  was  the  three- 
fold unity  which  the  presence  of  Jesus  produced,  and  to  it 
we  must  return  in  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  What 
prevents  it?  There  was  never  more  brotherly  kindness 
among  men  than  there  is  to-day.  All  Christians  are  trying 
to  follow  the  Good  Shepherd,  and  all  will  to  do  the  will  of 
God.  But  in  spite  of  this  we  have  not  been  able  to  agree 
upon  the  way  in  which  the  existing  tmity  can  express  itself. 
Well,  if  it  were  once  admitted  that  each  of  the  ways  now 
in  use  had  certain  advantages,  might  we  not  agree  to 
honor  one  another  in  the  continuance  of  those  ways  which 
have  been  found  by  experience  to  nourish  the  spiritual 
life  ?  If  that  were  our  spirit,  we  should  be  able  to  see  why 
the  different  plans  for  church  unity  on  which  so  much 
earnest  labor  and  a  sincere  desire  for  nobler  religious  life 
have  been  expended,  yet  have  failed,  and  we  believe  must 
continue  to  fail  until  we  find  the  way  of  Jesus  in  the  realiza- 
tion of  the  spiritual  unity  for  which  our  Saviour  prayed. 

fundamental  Idea  of  the  difficult  Johannine  passage  (15 :  15),  'But  if  all 
prophesy,  and  one  come  in  that  believeth  not,  or  one  unlearned,  he  is 
convinced  of  all,  he  is  judged  of  all:  and  thus  are  the  secrets  of  his 
heart  made  manifest;  and  so  falling  down  on  his  face,  he  will  worship 
God,  and  report  that  God  is  in  you  of  a  truth '  (I  Cor.  14 :  24,  25).  The 
evangelist  gives  a  wider  application  to  the  idea  of  Paul.  He  imagines 
the  church  as  a  whole  confronting  the  incredulous  world  and  impress- 
ing"it  with  the  sense  of  a  divine  power,  which  finds  expression  in  the 
various  Christian  activities.  In  this  manner  the  work  of  the  spirit  will 
have  a  universal  significance,  although  its  proper  and  exclusive  sphere 
is  the  church,"— "The  Fourth  Gospel,"  E.  F.  Scott,  p.  337. 


SPIRITUAL  UNITY  107 

I  am  convinced  that  a  vital  unity  of  Christians  cannot 
be  obtained  by  ignoring  the  past.  I  believe  that  what  is 
now  needed  is  a  fair  statement  of  the  position  of  each  of 
the  churches,  so  that  there  will  be  a  better  understanding 
of  the  reason,  not  alone  for  the  original  separation,  but 
also  for  the  continuance  of  each.  It  is  because  of  this  that 
I  shall  venture,  even  at  the  risk  of  being  thought  sectarian, 
to  point  out  why,  in  my  opinion,  the  Episcopal  Church  is 
not  justified  in  allowing  itself  to  be  absorbed  into  a  general 
American  Church,  which  might  fail  to  safeguard  those 
things  without  which  I  fear  the  larger  church  might  lose 
much  that  is  of  permanent  value.  But  the  same  is  true  of 
all  the  churches.  Not  by  ignoring  our  differences,  but  by 
emphasizing  our  principles,  shall  we  be  in  a  position  to 
know  what  is  of  permanent  and  what  of  merely  temporary 
value. 

I  would  suggest  then  that,  paradoxical  as  it  may  seem, 
the  first  step  toward  more  effective  association  will  be 
found  not  in  ignoring  the  differences  of  the  churches,  but, 
on  the  contrary,  in  glorifying  them.  "He  that  doeth  truth 
Cometh  to  the  light,  that  his  works  may  be  made  manifest, 
that  they  are  wrought  in  God.''  Suppose  each  of  the 
churches  were  to  set  forth  in  popular  form  the  reasons  that 
lead  its  members  to  think  that  their  church  was  not  only 
justified  in  separating  from  some  other  group  in  the  past, 
but  is  also  justified  in  continuing  to  bear  witness  to  that 
aspect  of  truth  which  seems  to  them  valuable  for  the  whole 
body  of  Christ,  it  might  be  that  there  would  result  such  a 
mutual  understanding  and  respect  for  one  another  as  would 
enable  each  church  to  learn  from  every  other,  and  so  pre- 
pare the  way  for  some  more  effective  association  of  the 
various  churches  than  is  now  possible.  Too  long  has  the 
**hand"  said  to  the  "foot":  "Because  you  are  not  the 
hand  you  are  not  of  the  body."  Let  us  now  see  what  each 
member  has  to  say  for  itself,  and  what  it  believes  to  be  its 
value  not  to  itself  alone  but  to  the  whole  body  of  Christ, 


io8         THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

It  is  because  I  believe  that  the  Episcopal  Church  has  a 
gift  for  the  American  Church  of  the  future  that  I  would 
not  have  it  enticed  into  a  poor  imitation  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church;  not  that  I  fail  to  recognize  that  the 
Roman  Church  has  also  a  contribution  to  make,  but  only 
that  it  is  unwilling  to  make  its  contribution  till  every  other 
church  has  denied  the  grace  which  God  has  given  it.  And, 
on  the  other  hand,  I  believe  it  would  be  a  loss  to  the  future 
religious  life  of  this  land  were  the  Episcopal  Church  to  be 
absorbed  into  a  great  American  religious  trust,  without  the 
assurance  that  the  things  which  those  who  belong  to  that 
church  have  found  helpful  will  be  guarded  and  kept  for 
the  welfare  of  those  who  are  to  come  after.  But  what  I 
believe  of  the  church  which  I  know  best  and  love  most,  I 
believe  also  of  all  the  churches.  With  this  in  mind,  and 
because  I  know  of  no  book  in  reasonable  compass  which 
so  deals  with  the  Episcopal  Church,  I  venture  to  ask  the 
reader  to  look  with  me  into  the  meaning  of  that  church 
and  consider  if  it  have  not  a  value  which  has  not  been 
appreciated,  partly  because  of  the  sectarian  spirit  in  which 
the  value  of  it  has  been  too  often  exhibited. 


CHAPTER  IX 
THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION 

The  first  question  which  will  be  asked  by  those  in  the 
Episcopal  Church  who  have  been  in  the  habit  of  thinking 
of  their  church  as  the  exclusive  depository  of  God's  grace, 
is:  "What  advantage,  then,  have  we  who  belong  to  this 
church,  if  it  be  once  admitted  that  the  means  of  grace, 
which  we  have  been  taught  can  be  found  only  in  an  organ- 
ization which  enjoys  the  apostolic  ministry,  are  really  ex- 
istent in  other  organizations  ? " 

In  order  to  answer  that  question,  it  might  be  well  for  us 
to  remember  that  the  crisis  which  came  to  the  Jewish 
Church  and  ended  so  disastrously,  came  also  to  the  Apos- 
tolic Church,  and,  therefore,  may  come  to  us  as  well,  even 
if  we  have  the  apostolic  ministry. 

Only  careful  students  of  the  New  Testament  know  how 
near  the  Christian  church  came  to  making  the  great  re- 
fusal, under  the  leadership  of  the  prince  of  the  apostles, 
Simon  the  son  of  Jonas.  They  also  know  that  it  was  Paul 
who  saved  the  church,  even  as  the  author  of  the  Book  of 
Jonah  would  have  saved  the  Jewish  Church. 

The  early  Christians  inherited  from  their  Jewish  fathers 
a  repugnance  to  the  Gentiles.  They  found  it  almost  im- 
possible to  believe  that  those  who  had  not  enjoyed  the 
privilege  of  the  Law  had,  nevertheless,  been  under*  the 
guiding  hand  of  God.  So  when  Paul  said  that  "  God  hath 
made  of  one  blood  all  nations  to  dwell  on  the  face  of  the 
whole  earth,  that  they  might  seek  after  him  and  find  him," 
the  question  which  immediately  arose  was:  "What  advan- 
tage then  hath  the  Jew?''  If  the  Jew  has  no  exclusive 
privilege,  what  advantage  has  he  ?    So,  in  the  same  way, 

109 


no        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

it  will  be  asked  to-day:  "If  we  of  the  Episcopal  Church, 
with  our  apostolic  ministry,  have  no  exclusive  privilege, 
what  advantage  have  we?"  In  other  words:  "If  this 
church  of  ours,  differing  from  our  Protestant  brethren  in 
manner  of  worship  and  in  discipline,  is  unable  to  enter  into 
perfect  conununion  with  our  fellow  Christians  in  this 
country,  would  it  not  be  better  for  us  to  abandon  those 
things  which  are  peculiar  to  us,  and  be  absorbed  into  the 
religious  life  of  America  ?  If  we  do  not  do  this,  are  we  not 
schismatics?"  It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  those  who 
ask  the  question  have  no  intention  of  doing  this,  but  that 
they  ask  the  question  simply  because  they  believe  it  to  be 
valuable  in  controversy.  Nevertheless,  it  is  a  fair  ques- 
tion and  should  be  answered. 

What  advantage,  then,  has  the  Episcopal  Church?  If 
by  advantage  is  meant  means  of  eternal  salvation,  I  answer 
frankly  that  I  believe  we  have  none  that  is  not  shared  by 
all  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  But  if  by  advantage  is  meant 
what  do  we  hold  in  trust  for  the  future  religious  Ufe  of  this 
country,  then  I  say  with  St.  Paul:  "Much  every  way." 

In  every  organization  there  are  three  things  which  dis- 
tinguish it:  doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship.  We  shall 
speak  of  these  a  little  later.  For  the  moment,  I  should 
like  to  speak  in  a  more  general  way  of  certain  characteris- 
tics of  the  Episcopal  Church,  which  are  either  lacking  or 
at  least  are  not  emphasized  in  other  churches. 

The  first  is  that,  so  far  as  I  know,  the  Episcopal  Church 
is  the  only  American  religious  organization  that  is  con- 
sciously endeavoring  to  keep  alive  the  spirit  of  unity 
among  the  English-speaking  peoples  of  the  world.  And 
this  it  is  seeking  to  do  by  reminding  us  of  the  fundamental 
glory  of  the  English  people.  This  the  Episcopal  Church 
tried  to  do  in  the  beginning  and  is  trying  to  do  to-day. 

Whoever  will  take  the  trouble  to  read  carefully  the 
Preface  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  will  see  that  our 
fathers  were  very  particular  in  stating  that  they  had  no 


THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION  ill 

desire  to  depart  from  the  English  Church,  except  in  so  far 
as  the  political  conditions  of  the  day  made  necessary.  It 
required  great  courage  to  say  such  a  thing  at  that  time,  for 
the  English  Church  in  the  colonies  lay  under  deep  suspi- 
cion, and  not  without  reason.  Many  churchmen  had  been 
Tories;  not  a  few  of  the  clergy  had  deserted  the  country 
in  its  hour  of  danger.  More  tiian  that:  the  dislike  of  the 
English  Church  had  its  roots  in  the  beginning  of  our  colo- 
nial history.  In  New  England  the  word  "bishop''  was  as 
distasteful  as  the  word  "pope"  in  an  Orange  lodge!  In 
New  York  the  Dutch  Church — ^possibly  for  reasons  not 
altogether  disconnected  from  real  estate — ^was  not  particu- 
larly friendly  to  Trinity  Parish,  which  was  practically  the 
Episcopal  Church  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State.  In 
Pennsylvania  the  Quakers  looked  askance  at  any  church 
which  laid  emphasis  on  the  value  of  rites  and  ceremonies. 
In  the  South  the  Methodists  could  never  forget  the  flout- 
ing of  the  saintly  Wesley  by  the  bishops  of  his  day.  They 
contrasted  his  life  with  that  of  the  fox-hunting  parsons  of 
the  Old  Dominion,  and  drew  conclusions  not  favorable  to 
a  church  which  was  helpless  to  deal  with  open  scandal. 
The  Baptists,  following  the  track  of  the  "Winners  of  the 
West,"  carried  with  them  the  story  of  Bunyan's  imprison- 
ment. More  than  that,  the  strong  belief  in  democracy 
was  leading  to  the  reversal  of  King  James's  shrewd  saying, 
"No  bishop,  no  king,"  to  "No  king,  no  bishop." 

Now,  with  these  strong  and  not  altogether  unjustified 
prejudices  affecting  the  public  mind,  it  required  great 
courage  for  men  who  wished  to  commend  their  church  to 
the  new  republic,  boldly  to  state  on  the  first  page  of  their 
service-book  that  they  had  no  desire  to  depart  from  the 
mother  church  of  England,  save  as  the  poHtical  exigencies 
of  the  day  made  necessary. 

Their  courage  was  based  upon  a  true  vision  of  the  mean- 
ing of  the  conflict  from  which  the  colonies  had  just  emerged 
with  triumph.    Bishop  White  and  Dr.  Duche  were  as 


112        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

truly  patriotic  as  were  Washington  and  John  Adams,  and 
much  in  the  same  way.  They  all  had  a  true  understand- 
ing of  the  meaning  of  the  American  Revolution,  a  meaning 
that  has  not  penetrated  the  minds  of  a  good  many  of  our 
fellow  countrymen  even  to  this  day.  They  understood 
that  the  war  was  not  against  England,  but  against  a  Ger- 
man autocrat.*  They  believed  they  were  fighting  for  the 
liberties  of  Englishmen.  This  truth  was  recognized  in 
England  by  such  men  as  Burke  and  Chatham  and  Coke, 
of  Norfolk — the  last-mentioned  of  whom  is  said  to  have 
drunk  the  health  of  Washington  every  day.  This  is  now 
recognized  by  most  English  historians.  Indeed,  it  is  not 
too  much  to  say  that  the  foundation-stone  of  the  present 
British  Empire  was  laid  on  Bunker  Hill.  Our  fathers 
fought  not  against  England  but  against  a  king  who,  had 
he  been  able  to  have  his  way,  would  have  made  of  England 
what  Frederick  William  made  of  Prussia.  This  the  wisest 
of  our  fathers  saw.  While  they  fought  against  the  soldiers 
of  the  king,  whether  sent  from  England  or  from  Germany, 
their  hearts  were  true  to  the  motherland,  and  they  desired 
to  found  in  this  country  an  organization  which  would  keep 
aHve  the  remembrance  of  the  ideal  England. 

They  were  wise  again  in  understanding  that  that  ideal 
England  was  to  be  found  not  in  the  changing  government 
of  the  day.  But  they  knew  that  there  is  a  difference  be- 
tween political  organization  and  the  great  people  which  the 
government  of  the  day  may  or  may  not  represent.  They 
believed  that  the  heart  of  England  was  to  be  found  in  the 
English  Church,  which  Mrs.  Humphry  Ward  has  finely 
described  as  ''England  in  its  aspect  of  faith.'' 

It  is  because  the  Episcopal  Church  is  a  potent  force  in 
keeping  alive  the  remembrance  of  the  ideal  England  and 
the  ideal  America  which  are  essentially  one,  that  the  value 
of  that  church  primarily  consists.    Most  thoughtful  men 

*  While  George  III  was  born  in  England,  his  temperament  was  essen- 
tially German. 


THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION  113 

are  agreed  that  in  the  crisis  of  the  world  to-day  the  future 
of  civilization  largely  depends  upon  the  faithful  and  earnest 
co-operation,  the  mutual  understanding  and  reciprocal  re- 
spect of  these  two  great  branches  of  the  English-speaking 
peoples  of  the  world. 

The  conditions  have  greatly  changed  since  our  fathers 
wrote  the  Preface  to  the  Prayer-Book.  The  opposition  of 
our  Protestant  brethren  to  the  Church  of  England  has 
died  down,  and,  if  it  exists  at  all,  it  is  now  directed  against 
the  "establishment"  rather  than  against  the  church.  The 
Lutherans  cannot  be  expected  to  be  very  enthusiastic,  be- 
cause their  traditions  are  largely  German;  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  is  intensely  hostile,  first,  because  it  is 
largely  Irish,  and,  secondly,  because  the  stronghold  of  Prot- 
estantism has  been  transferred  from  Germany  to  England. 
In  England  the  Protestant  Church  is  the  representative  of 
the  people  and  the  people  are  loyal  to  it. 

Is  there  not  need,  then,  for  just  such  a  church  as  this — • 
a  church  which  will  influence  the  life  of  the  people  of  this 
land  so  as  to  cement  the  spiritual  imion  of  the  great  race 
of  which  we  form  so  important  a  part  ? 

The  second  thing  to  which  attention  should  be  called, 
because  I  think  it  characteristic  of  the  Anglican  com- 
munion to  a  degree  not  found  in  any  other,  is  the  spirit  of 
comprehension.  The  English  Reformation,  which  was,  it 
must  be  admitted,  marred  by  fanaticism,  political  wire- 
pulling, and  sometimes  by  an  ignoble  opportunist  spirit  of 
compromise,  had,  nevertheless,  a  great  ideal — a  nobler  one, 
I  believe,  than  any  other  church  existing  at  that  time. 
The  English  reformers  did  honestly  try  to  build  a  religious 
home  for  the  English  people,  in  which  men  whose  sympa- 
thies were  Puritan  could  worship  side  by  side  with  those 
whose  sympathies  were  Catholic,  provided  the  latter  were 
not  "papists" — that  is,  who  were  loyal  to  the  nation  when 
it  came  into  conflict  with  the  church.  I  do  not  say  the 
ideal  was  perfectly  realized — ^few  ideals  are — but  I  do  say 


114        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

it  has  influenced  the  life  of  the  English  people  in  a  way  we 
might  rejoice  to  have  the  churches  of  America  influence 
our  national  life.  For,  whatever  may  be  our  opinion  of 
an  established  church,  however  strongly  we  may  beUeve  in 
Cavour^s  dictum  that  "a  free  church  in  a  free  state"  is 
better  than  an  established  church  to  which  all  must  con- 
form, it  cannot  be  denied  that  an  estabhshed  church  has 
this  advantage,  that  it  does  impress  upon  men  the  truth 
that  they  are,  by  birth,  as  truly  members  of  a  church  as 
they  are  members  of  a  nation;  that  it  is  as  natural  for  them 
to  be  enrolled  in  the  church  by  baptism  as  it  is  for  them 
to  be  admitted  to  the  privilege  of  citizenship;  that,  at  the 
proper  time,  they  should  by  confirmation  themselves  ac- 
knowledge this  privilege,  and  take  their  place  at  their 
Father's  table  and  be  fed  with  the  bread  of  life  till  the  end. 
Undoubtedly  this  has  disadvantages  as  well.  It  may  lead 
to  mere  formalism  and  lessen  the  sense  of  personal  respon- 
sibility in  making  a  choice  of  the  life  which  they  should  lead. 
But  this  is  an  accident  and  not  a  consequence  of  the  life  in 
a  reUgious  nation. 

In  this  country,  where  Hberty  is  so  precious — and  it  can- 
not be  too  precious — there  has  been  a  constant  tendency 
to  disintegration.  The  result  of  the  multiplication  of 
churches  has  been  to  accustom  people  to  look  on  the  vari- 
ous churches  as  religious  clubs.  So,  just  as  we  have  clubs 
where  men  are  associated  together  because  they  agree — for 
example,  politically,  or  where  the  tradition  of  the  college 
from  which  they  graduated  is  kept  alive,  or  others  where 
the  imity  is  found  in  similar  tastes  in  art  or  literature  or 
music,  more  and  more  it  is  coming  to  be  felt  that  a  man  is 
welcome  in  one  or  other  of  these  religious  clubs  if  he  hap- 
pens to  be  in  entire  agreement  with  the  prevailing  opinion 
of  those  who  are  the  charter  members.  But  if  he  be  not  in 
entire  agreement,  it  is  thought  that  he  may  not  be  accept- 
able to  the  "admissions  committee,"  and  tiierefore  he  does 
not  seek  for  admission,  because  he  does  not  believe  that 


THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION  115 

he  will  feel  entirely  at  home  there,  and  has  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  he  is  missing  anything  that  is  of  permanent 
value  in  life.  Or  even  if  he  be  assured  that  he  will  be 
welcome,  even  though  he  do  not  agree  with  the  opinion 
prevailing  at  the  moment,  he  hesitates  to  enter  a  company 
where  it  will  be  supposed  that  he  accepts  the  traditional 
opinion  which  not  a  few  of  the  members  believe  to  be  the 
essence  of  membership.  The  result  of  this  wide-spread 
opinion  is  that  not  only  have  the  churches  disintegrated  in 
an  attempt  to  furnish  meeting-places  for  those  of  con- 
genial tastes,  but  also  the  individual  churches  are  rapidly 
disintegrating,  and  multitudes  of  men  who  need  the  church 
and  whom  the  church  needs  are  drifting  from  the  one  organ- 
ization where  the  deepest  things  of  life  are  constantly  kept 
before  their  minds. 

Now  the  Episcopal  Church,  while  it  has  not  committed 
itself  to  a  belief  in  an  established  church,  has  kept  alive 
the  English  conception  of  the  church  as  the  home  for  the 
children  of  various  temperaments  and  various  degrees  of 
religious  culture.  It  has  taught  that  the  church  is  not  a 
club — where  those  who  are  members  are  in  entire  agree- 
ment— but  has  other  grounds  of  appeal,  the  essential  one 
being  loyalty  to  Jesus  Christ,  making  that  the  link  be- 
tween widest  differences  within  the  fold.  The  result  has 
been  that  though  the  Episcopal  Church  is  not  large  as  com- 
pared with  some  others,  it  is  vital  and  growing  in  influence. 

There  are  ministers  in  its  orders  who  hold  a  theory  of 
the  Sacrament  which  the  plain  man  cannot  distinguish 
from  the  Roman  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  which  he 
believes  to  be  a  delusion.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are 
men  in  its  pulpits  who  are  thought  to  be  preaching — as 
men  in  his  day  believed  Phillips  Brooks  was  preaching — 
the  doctrine  of  Unitarianism.  To  the  sectarian  this  seems 
a  shocking  state  of  affairs.  But  to  the  churchman  it  is  a 
glory.  It  may  be  said:  "Why  is  it  a  glory?  Does  it  not 
mean  tibat  your  church  speaks  with  an  uncertain  voice? 


Ii6        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

That  you  have  no  standards  by  which  the  teaching  of  your 
church  can  be  judged?"  The  answer  is  that  we  have 
standards.  Of  those  we  will  speak  later.  But  for  the 
moment  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the  test  is  to  be  found  in 
the  loyalty  of  every  one  of  these  ministers  to  what  he  be- 
lieves to  be  the  teaching  of  the  church  of  which  he  is  a 
minister.  There  can  be  no  other  test  which  does  not  be- 
come a  tyranny.  The  conclusion  hastily  drawn  that  be- 
cause they  do  not  all  look  at  the  question  from  the  same 
angle  one  must  be  wrong  is  not  justified  by  the  facts. 
The  truth  is,  that  just  because  the  Episcopal  Church  has 
held  to  the  tradition  of  the  English  Church  and  has  tried 
to  make  a  home  for  men  of  various  opinions,  there  must 
be  found  in  its  standards  dififerences  which  each  is  justified 
in  emphasizing.  The  time  may  come  when  a  minister  or 
layman — and  there  is  no  doctrine  for  one  that  is  not  bind- 
ing upon  the  other — comes  to  the  conclusion  that  he  can- 
not conscientiously  continue  in  the  ministry  or  member- 
ship of  a  church  which  does  not  emphasize  exclusively  that 
aspect  of  truth  which  he  believes  to  be  of  vital  importance. 
In  this  case  he  must  withdraw.  I  do  not  believe  there  will 
be  found  any  man  in  the  ministry  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
who  is  ministering  at  its  altars  or  preaching  from  its  pul- 
pits who  does  not  believe  that  he  is  in  thorough  loyalty 
to  the  church  which  he  represents.  But  this  must  be  de- 
cided by  each  man  for  himself.  No  man's  loyalty  is  to 
be  judged  by  another's  conscience.  "Does  not  this  lead 
to  confusion?"  I  believe  it  leads  to  catholicity  of  spirit. 
The  spirit  of  comprehension  predicates  differences  of 
opinion  and  at  the  same  time  recognizes  that  the  true  bond 
of  union  is  loyalty  to  the  church,  which  is  wiser  and  greater 
than  the  individual.* 

*  An  analogous  spirit,  also  inherited  from  England,  is  found  in  our 
political  life,  where  the  minority  peacefully  submits  to  the  decision  of 
the  majority,  because  subconsciously  they  recognize  that  the  judgment 
of  the  whole  people  may  be  trusted  to  do  what  is  right.  See  "Charac- 
ter and  Opinion  in  the  United  States,"  George  Santayana,  p.  197. 


THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION  117 

Is  not  such  a  church  greatly  needed  in  this  country, 
where  the  scoffing  criticism  that  we  *'have  but  one  soup 
and  a  hundred  religions"  is  not  without  force?  Emerson 
says  that  **  Protestantism  began  by  establishing  many 
churches  in  which  each  man  has  had  his  own  pew,  and 
that  it  may  end  in  every  man  having  his  own  church"! 
It  is  to  this  we  are  tending.  And  that  means  that  we  are 
tending  to  the  end  of  all  churches.  The  only  possible  way 
in  which  religious  men  can  be  held  together  is  by  substitut- 
ing loyalty  to  Christ  for  theological  agreement. 

Such  a  church  is  greatly  needed.  No  one  of  the  existing 
churches  can  supply  that  particular  need.  Each  has  some 
contribution  to  make  to  the  ideal  American  Church,  but 
the  one  which  has  done  more  than  any  other  to  allow  the 
widest  interpretation  of  the  standard  to  which  all  are  loyal 
cannot  be  absorbed  into  the  general  religious  life  of  the 
country  without  loss  to  the  religious  life  of  the  commun- 
ity until  this  principle  has  been  recognized  and  applied. 
Every  church  is  suffering  for  this  lack  of  comprehension. 
The  children  of  fathers  and  mothers  whose  early  religious 
impressions  were  gained  in  a  Ptolemaic  universe  cannot 
worship  in  a  church  which  satisfies  their  parents,  for  they 
are  living  in  the  universe  discovered  by  Darwin,  unless  it 
is  understood  that  the  widest  liberty  of  individual  inter- 
pretation is  not  only  tolerated  but  also  welcomed. 

For  these  two  reasons  it  seems  to  me  that  the  Episcopal 
Church  should  be  kept  intact  until  these  things  have  been 
accepted  as  truisms  in  the  religious  life  of  America. 

But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  those  who  are  now  members 
of  the  Episcopal  Church  take  the  other  path  and  say,  "We 
alone  have  a  ministry  that  is  valid;  we  have  a  privilege 
that  no  other  church  can  claim,"  then,  in  my  judgment — 
and  I  believe  it  would  be  the  judgment  of  Paul  and  the 
judgment  of  Jesus — we  shall  be  in  danger  of  a  dreadful  dis- 
ease: the  hardening  of  the  arteries  of  human  sympathy,  ac- 
companied by  excessively  high  ecclesiastical  blood-pressure. 


ii8        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

But  if  we  say  to  ourselves  and  to  others,  "We  have  no 
exclusive  privilege,  but  we  have  great  and  unique  advan- 
tages, which  by  the  grace  of  God  we  will  hold  in  trust  for 
the  church  of  the  future,  which  will  mean  a  better  nation, 
a  better  church,  and  a  better  world,"  we  shall  have  ac- 
complished the  purposes  of  God,  and  done  our  part  to 
make  men  and  women  of  the  English-speaking  race  a 
nobler  power  in  the  future  than  they  have  been  in  the 
past.  Then  may  be  seen  that  ideal  American  Church 
which  in  the  large  spirit  of  comprehension  becomes  the 
servant  of  the  world. 

It  is  not  a  pleasant  thing  to  be  told,  but  it  is  well  that 
Episcopalians  should  be  reminded,  that  many  of  their 
brethren  of  other  churches  feel  that  the  weakness  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  lies  in  what  they  believe  to  be  a  lack  of 
loyalty  to  Christ.  Indeed,  that  is  what  they  believe  con- 
stitutes the  difference  between  high  and  low  churchmen. 
The  latter  they  think  of  as  more  "evangelicar'  than  the 
others.  I  feel  that  I  can  speak  with  a  certain  authority 
on  this  question,  because  my  early  training  was  entirely 
among  high  churchmen,  and  people  who  more  faithfully 
endeavored  to  follow  the  "footsteps  of  that  most  blessed 
life,"  I  do  not  think  could  be  found  in  any  company  of 
Christians. 

I  believe  the  misapprehension  is  due  to  a  confusion  on 
the  part  of  "evangelicals"  in  all  the  churches  between  per- 
sonal devotion  to  the  Jesus  of  the  gospels  and  loyalty  to 
Christ.  It  is  due  to  this  that  it  is  often  supposed  that 
members  of  the  Episcopal  Church  have  transferred  from 
Jesus  to  the  church  the  devotion  which  is  his  due.  But 
this  I  believe  to  be  due  to  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
churchman's  conception  of  the  church.  He  does  not  con- 
sider the  church  as  the  rival  of  Jesus,  but  as  the  manifes- 
tation of  his  spirit.  He  feels  that  in  being  obedient  to  the 
tradition  of  the  church  he  is  following  the  footsteps  of  our 
Lord.    Here,  I  think,  we  find  the  dividing  line  between  the 


THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION  119 

Anglican  and  the  German  Church  historians.  Such  a 
great  scholar  and  teacher  as  Harnack  seems  to  think  that 
after  the  days  of  the  primitive  church  there  was  a  falling 
away,  and  that  the  true  escape  from  the  power  of  the 
"secular"  is  to  be  found  in  a  "return  to  Jesus."  How  dif- 
ferent is  this  from  the  teaching  of  the  late  Prof.  A.  V.  G. 
Allen,  who  followed  the  Anglican  tradition !  To  him  the 
development  of  the  churches  history  was  not  a  lapse  into 
the  secular,  but  rather  an  evolution  under  the  guidance  of 
the  spirit  of  God,  which  is  the  spirit  of  Christ.  To  those 
who  so  read  history,  while  they  must  admit  that  there 
have  been  sad  departures  from  the  spirit  of  the  Master, 
the  way  to  enter  into  his  spirit  is  not  by  a  return  to  the 
past — ever  an  impossibility,  and  therefore  an  undesirable 
thing  to  seek — but  by  the  fuller  understanding  of  the  lead- 
ing of  the  same  spirit  as  it  is  manifested  in  the  continuous 
progress  of  the  church.  The  "Continuity  of  Christian 
Thought"  is  more  than  a  happy  title  to  a  most  instructive 
book;  it  is  also  a  summary  of  a  vital  philosophy  of  history* 
If  the  spirit  of  Christ  is  being  manifested  in  the  church, 
then  loyalty  to  the  church  is  loyalty  to  Christ. 

But  it  may  be  asked:  "Is  the  spirit  of  Christ  being  mani- 
fested in  the  churches.?"  If  not,  then  of  course  there  is 
no  reason  why  any  devout  Christian  should  continue  in 
their  communion.  But  it  has  already  been  admitted  that 
the  spirit  of  Jesus  is  seen  in  the  lives  of  men  and  women  in 
every  communion.  "Yes,"  it  will  be  said,  "but  this  spirit 
is  the  result  of  the  individual  communion  of  the  soul  with 
the  Master."  This  is  true.  But  it  is  not  the  whole  truth. 
It  has  been  forgotten  that  "No  man  liveth  to  himself." 
We  are  individuals,  but  we  are  more  than  individuals.  We 
are  a  part  of  the  past  which  has  made  us  what  we  are. 
No  man  can  understand  the  influence  of  Jesus  who  does 
not  know  more  than  his  own  individual  experience  has  re- 
vealed. "I  am  a  part  of  all  that  I  have  met."  That  is  a 
truth  which  the  Anglican  and  Roman  communions  have 


I20        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

emphasized  more  than  the  Protestant  churches  as  a  whole. 
I  am  far  from  denying  that  in  this  there  has  too  often  been 
a  failure  to  develop  the  life  of  the  individual  soul  by  fresh 
communion  with  Jesus,  and  for  that  reason  it  is  important 
that  the  Protestant  churches,  which  have  held  so  tena- 
ciously to  that  vital  truth,  should  not  perish  from  the 
earth.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  if  that  individual  experi- 
ence be  not  supplemented  and  enlarged  by  what  we  call 
the  historic  consciousness,  there  will  be  inevitably  a  shrink- 
age of  the  content  of  reHgion,  and  it  will  have  no  appeal 
to  those  who  are  beginning  to  understand,  as  never  before 
was  possible,  what  a  wonderful  thing  the  Church  of  the 
Living  God  is. 

The  Episcopal  Church  has  maintained  this  historic  con- 
sciousness by  the  perpetuation  of  the  ancient  rites  and 
ceremonies  and  the  constant  use  of  those  forms  of  worship 
which  have  come  down  from  ancient  times.  For  this  rea- 
son, too,  it  is  loath  to  give  up  the  expression  of  its  living 
faith  as  it  was  expressed  in  days  when  men  thought  differ- 
ently from  what  they  do  to-day  of  the  world,  of  man,  and 
of  God. 

It  may  be  said:  "All  this  is  far  more  true  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  than  of  any  Protestant  church.''  This 
may  be  admitted  without  in  any  way  derogating  from  the 
glory  of  the  Anglican  communion.  The  Roman  Catholic 
Church  has  indeed  kept  to  the  tradition  of  the  fathers,  but 
it  has  not  only  lacked  discrimination  and  so  embodied  in 
the  tradition  much  that  is  alien  to  the  spirit  of  Christ;  it 
has  also  laid  such  undue  emphasis  upon  the  organization 
as  to  obscure  if  not  destroy  the  spontaneity  of  the  individ- 
ual soul.  There  is  a  truth  in  the  much-condemned  "Via 
Media"  which  needs  to  be  recognized  to-day.  The  ques- 
tion is  not  between  Rome  and  Geneva,  the  question  is  be- 
tween autocracy  and  democracy.  Either  carried  to  its 
logical  conclusion  becomes  a  curse  to  mankind.  The  lib- 
erty that  finds  its  highest  expression  in  service  is  the  ideal 
for  which  the  world  longs. 


THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION  121 

This  has  been  the  ideal  of  the  Anglican  communion,  and 
it  believes  that  it  can  only  be  obtained  by  the  union  of  the 
wide  experience  of  the  past  guiding  and  inspiring  the  indi- 
vidual experience  of  the  present.  To  hold  the  balance 
even  is  no  more  easy  here  than  in  other  departments  of 
life.  And  it  may  well  be  that  in  the  Anglican  communion 
the  individual  soul  has  been  sometimes  overlooked  in  the 
endeavor  to  reproduce  a  sense  of  the  corporate  communion. 
It,  then,  is  not  true,  as  is  sometimes  supposed,  that  the 
Episcopal  Church  is  indifferent  to  the  devotion  of  the  soul 
to  Christ,  but,  rather,  that  its  emphasis  has  been  laid  upon 
the  larger  communion. 

If  this  be  true,  then  it  will  be  seen  that  the  Episcopal 
Church  does  not  think  of  the  church  as  the  rival  of  Christ, 
but  rather  as  a  potent — though  by  no  means  exclusive — 
means  of  full  communion  with  him. 

Until  that  is  recognized  there  can,  I  think,  be  no  real 
understanding  of  the  reason  for  its  insistence  upon  the  per- 
petuation of  its  doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship.  To  the 
consideration  of  these  we  will  now  turn,  not  in  the  conven- 
tional order  in  which  they  have  been  just  named,  but  in 
the  order  which  may  make  clearer  what  it  is  in  each  that 
we  value. 

The  decision  of  our  fathers  to  follow  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land so  far  as  possible  in  a  republic  freed  from  aU  interfer- 
ence by  the  state  met  with  a  serious  difl&culty  in  perpetuat- 
ing the  ministry  of  the  English  Church.  Before  1787  there 
had  been  no  bishops  in  America,  and  every  minister  of  the 
Church  of  England  in  the  colonies  had  been  obliged  to  seek 
ordination  in  England.  How  great  the  difficulties  were 
the  records  of  travel  in  those  days  reveal.  Besides  the 
"peril  by  water,"  the  expense  was  almost  prohibitive.  As 
a  result  many  of  the  clergy  had  come  out  from  England, 
with  all  the  prejudices  which  one  would  expect  from  men 
trained  in  the  great  universities  and  now  thrown  into  a 
land,  as  it  seemed  to  them,  but  half  civilized.    The  piety 


122        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

of  the  mother  church  at  that  time  was  at  a  low  ebb,  and 
some  of  the  men  who  came  out  to  minister  in  the  new  land 
were  those  who  could  obtain  no  benefice  at  home  *  The 
wonder  is  not  that  there  should  have  been  imworthy  min- 
isters, but  that  the  English  Church  should  have  survived 
at  all.  What  appeal  could  such  men  make  to  the  youth 
of  this  land  ?  And  how  could  they  compete  with  the  min- 
isters of  other  churches  who  had  been  trained  in  the  native 
colleges  and  were  filled  with  an  enthusiasm  for  the  new 
republic  and  had  a  profound  faith  in  the  people  whom 
they  knew  and  loved  ?  Moreover,  not  only  were  the  min- 
isters of  the  English  Church  at  a  disadvantage,  but  the 
laity  were  without  the  full  administration  of  the  rites  of 
their  church.  No  children  could  be  confirmed,  with  the 
result  that  many  were  never  admitted  to  the  communion, 
and  those  who  were  admitted  were  often  lacking  in  that 
serious  preparation  which  would  fit  them  to  undertake  the 
responsibilities  of  their  membership. 

How  great  must  have  been  the  temptation  to  follow  the 
example  of  Wesley  and  appoint  overseers  who  would  guide 
the  flock  in  the  wilderness !  How  practical  must  it  have 
seemed  to  the  "man  in  the  street"  to  accept  the  suggestion 
of  ^Benjamin  Franklin  that  he  and  John  Adams  should  con- 
secrate Dr.  Seabury!  How  strong  must  have  been  the 
repugnance  to  seek  favors  from  a  church  which  had  so 
shamefully  neglected  its  children  who  were  scattered 
abroad!  The  reference,  in  the  Preface  to  the  Prayer- 
Book,  to  the  "long  continuance  of  the  nursing  care  and 
protection"  of  the  Church  of  England  must  seem  to  be 
either  an  example  of  biting  irony  or  else  an  imitation  of 
the  fulsome  and  insincere  flattery  of  the  Preface  to  the 
King  James  version  of  the  Bible.  But  Bishop  White, 
while  not  without  a  sense  of  humor,  was  not  the  man  to 

*  Those  who  do  not  care  to  read  more  serious  histories  may  turn  to 
Thackeray's  "The  Virginians"  for  a  picture  of  the  English  Church  in 
the  colonies  immediately  before  the  Revolution. 


THE  ENGLISH  TRADITION  123 

indulge  in  such  subtlety  as  irony,  and  was  too  honest  to 
flatter  any  man.  The  truth  is,  the  "nursing  care'*  had 
not  been  altogether  lacking,  but  it  had  been  provided,  not 
by  the  bishop  of  London,  to  whose  diocese  the  colonial 
churches  were  officially  assigned,  but  by  the  missionary 
spirit  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in 
Foreign  Parts.  "Queen  Anne's  Bounty"  and  some  com- 
munion services  given  by  one  of  the  Georges  had  a  certain 
material  value,  but  the  spiritual  gifts  were  the  offerings  of 
a  voluntary  society,  without  which  the  English  Church  in 
this  land  would  have  perished. 

"Why,  then,"  it  may  be  asked,  "were  our  fathers  so 
solicitous  to  perpetuate  the  ministry  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land when  they  might  have  followed  the  example  of  those 
who  set  up  a  new  form  of  civil  government  ?"  No  doubt 
the  first  reason  was  that  they  desired  to  perpetuate  the 
ministry  with  which  those  who  were  already  members  of 
the  church  were  familiar,  and  also,  as  has  been  already 
pointed  out,  they  were  desirous  of  continuing  in  the  new 
land  the  church  which  had  been  a  unifying  force  in  the  old. 
Of  course  those  who  hold  to  the  exclusive  theory  of  the 
episcopate  will  see  in  this  an  indication  of  the  overruling 
Providence  which  insured  the  one  true  ministry  to  this 
nation!  But  we  are  dealing  not  with  theories  but  with 
the  facts  of  history.  So  far  as  we  can  discover.  Bishop 
White  and  his  fellow  laborers  held  no  such  exclusive  view 
of  the  ministry.*  In  the  Preface  to  the  Prayer-Book  they 
simply  claim  for  themselves  the  same  liberty  as  was  en- 
joyed by  "the  different  religious  denominations  of  Chris- 
tians in  these  States  ...  to  model  and  organize  their 
respective  churches  and  forms  of  worship  and  discipline  in 
such  manner  as  they  might  judge  most  convenient  for  their 
future  prosperity." 

*  That  Bishop  White  seriously  contemplated  an  abandonment  of  the 
Episcopacy  is  well  known.  See  "The  Holy  Communion  in  Great 
Britain  and  America,"  J.  Brett  Langstaff. 


124        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

Our  fathers  then  determined  to  perpetuate  the  mmis- 
try  of  the  English  Church  because  they  deemed  it  "con- 
venient" so  to  do.  Unquestionably,  there  were  men  in 
the  English  Church  at  that  time  who  believed  that  no 
ministry  save  the  Episcopal  was  in  accordance  with  God's 
will,  just  as  there  were  probably  to  be  found  as  late  as  the 
nineteenth  century  men  who  held  to  the  nonjurors'  be- 
lief in  the  divine  right  of  kings.  But  they  were  the  ex- 
ceptions. Tillotson,  Bishop  Butler,  and  Paley  were  the 
representatives  of  the  prevailing  opinion  in  the  English 
Church  in  the  eighteenth  century,  and  they  would  have 
repudiated  such  a  theory.  They  also  believed  in  episcopacy 
because  it  was  "convenient"  or  expedient. 

So  much  for  the  reasons  which  led  our  fathers  to  insist 
upon  a  ministry  which  was  apparently  opposed  to  the 
democratic  spirit  of  their  day.  They  were  subconsciously 
influenced  by  the  tradition  of  the  English  Church,  as  the 
framers  of  the  federal  Constitution  were  influenced  by 
the  tradition  of  the  political  life  of  the  English  people. 

To  this  tradition  we  must  now  turn  if  we  would  know 
why  to  many  thoughtful  Christians  the  Episcopal  minis- 
try seems  to  have  a  value  for  this  day  and  country.  In 
this  I  shall  not  argue  nor  shall  I  quote  authorities.  The 
opinions  expressed  are  the  result  of  many  years  of  study, 
and  those  who  are  interested  will  find  the  authorities  open 
to  them  as  to  every  student  of  the  history  of  the  church. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  St.  Paul  says:  "He  that 
descended  is  the  same  also  that  ascended  up  far  above  all 
heavens  that  he  might  fill  all  things;  and  he  gave  some  to 
be  apostles  and  some  evangelists  and  some  pastors  and 
teachers  for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of 
the  ministry,  for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ."  It 
will  be  noted  that  in  this  description  of  the  ministry  as  it 
existed  in  his  day  the  apostle  says  that  it  was  one  of  the 
"gifts"  which  followed  the  ascension  of  Christ.  What 
we  understand  by  this  somewhat  unfamiliar  language  is 
not  that  the  ministry  was  settled  in  a  permanent  form 
by  Jesus  when  he  walked  with  his  disciples  on  the  earth, 
but  was  the  result  of  the  influence  of  the  spirit  of  Christ, 
which  led  to  the  establishment  of  a  ministry  which  was 
found  suitable  for  the  upbuilding  of  the  church  and  mak- 
ing men  good.  These  men  were  not  "officials."  They 
were  what  they  were  because  each  had  some  particular 
"gift"  or  aptitude  for  the  particular  work  to  which  he 
felt  himself  called.  One  man  showed  that  he  had  the 
"apostolic"  gift.  When  the  word  "apostle"  is  used  to- 
day we  are  apt  to  think  of  one  of  the  Twelve  whom  Jesus 
appointed,  whom  he  called  apostles  or  ambassadors.  They 
were  to  go  forth  and  bear  witness  to  the  fact  that  the  king 
had  come,  and  that  all  who  would  be  saved  must  obey 
the  law  of  the  kingdom  of  God;  just  as  William  the  Con- 
queror sent  his  ambassadors  to  the  Saxon  thanes,  bidding 
all  to  come  and  "lay  their  hands  in  his"  and  work  loyally 
with  him  for  the  building  up  of  a  true  kingdom  of  Eng- 
land. After  the  death  of  Judas,  we  read  that  the  Eleven 
came  together  to  choose  one  to  take  the  place  of  the  traitor. 

12$ 


126        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

We  are  told  that  the  reason  they  did  this  was  that  they 
felt  it  necessary  that  there  should  be  twelve  to  carry  on 
the  work  to  which  the  Master  had  called  them.  There  is 
no  hint  that  this  was  the  ordination  of  a  minister,  still  less 
that  the  Eleven  had  in  mind  to  perpetuate  a  "succession"; 
on  the  contrary,  we  are  told  that  their  purpose  was  to  com- 
plete what  might  be  called  the  twelve  witnesses,  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Twelve  Tribes.  They  said  that  those 
only  should  be  considered  who  had  been  familiar  with  the 
ministry  of  Jesus  from  the  preaching  of  John  the  Baptist 
until  "he  was  taken  up."  Two  such  men  were  found. 
They  did  not  "elect"  one  of  them;  they  cast  lots,  and 
"the  lot  fell  upon  Matthias,  and  he  was  numbered  among 
the  eleven  apostles."  Probably  the  Eleven  laid  hands 
upon  him,  but  no  mention  is  made  of  it  if  they  did. 
These  men  were  not  in  any  sense  "officials";  they  were 
witnesses  to  the  ministry  and  resurrection  of  Jesus.  In 
the  nature  of  the  case  they  could  have  no  "successors." 

But  by  the  time  of  Paul  the  name  "apostle"  was  being 
given  to  others  who  had  never  seen  Jesus,  and  therefore 
could  not  be  numbered  among  the  Twelve,  though  they 
were  carrying  on  the  work  for  which  the  Twelve  had  been 
originally  chosen.  As  the  Twelve  had  been  sent  forth  by 
Jesus  to  declare  that  the  king,  in  the  person  of  Jesus,  was 
now  among  men,  so  the  new  "apostles"  were  going  forth 
to  declare  that  Christ  the  king  of  glory  was  as  truly  in 
human  life  as  Jesus  had  been  in  Palestine.  They  were 
not  the  ambassadors  of  Jesus  as  the  Twelve  had  been,  but 
"ambassadors  of  Christ."  Some  of  these  men  had  not 
seen  the  Twelve  as  had  Paul,  though  he  is  emphatic  in 
stating  that  he  had  not  been  ordained  by  them.  The  only 
ordination  Paul  had  received  was  from  Christ  himself. 
In  other  words,  he  had  received  the  apostolic  "gift."  So 
had  many  others,  most  of  whom  are  scarcely  now  known 
by  name,  such  as  Junius  and  Andronicus  as  well  as  Barna- 
bas.  The  latter  can  never  be  forgotten,  and  the  significance 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY     127 

of  his  **gift*^  has  been  kept  alive  in  the  Prayer-Book  by 
the  beautiful  Collect  for  St.  Barnabas  Day,  written  in 

1549:* 

"O  Lord  God  Almighty,  who  did  endue  thy  holy  Apostle 
Barnabas  with  singular  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  leave  us 
not,  we  beseech  thee,  destitute  of  thy  manifold  gifts,  nor 
yet  of  grace  to  use  them  always  to  thy  honour  and  glory; 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord." 

But  Paul  had  more  than  the  ambassadorial  gift;  he  was 
first  known  as  the  "chief  speaker,"  but  later  he  showed 
that  he  had  pre-eminently  the  love  of  organization — which 
later  was  called  "government."  He  not  only  converted 
individuals,  he  organized  his  converts  into  local  congrega- 
tions or  churches.  So  it  came  to  pass  that  the  gift  of  or- 
ganization became  the  characteristic  of  an  apostle  even 
more  than  the  gift  of  preaching.  Paul  was  soon  surpassed 
by  Apollos  as  a  preacher. 

Then  began  that  process  of  differentiation  which  is  the 
sign  of  progress.  Men  were  found  with  a  special  gift  for 
preaching  but  with  no  peculiar  "executive  ability"  as  we 
say  to-day.  These  were  called  "prophets."  Others  could 
neither  organize  nor  preach  but  they  were  gifted  with  a 
marvellous  memory.  They  remembered  what  they  them- 
selves had  heard  the  Lord  say,  or  they  could  accurately 
report  what  they  had  been  told  by  those  who  had  been  the 
eye-witnesses  of  the  wonderful  works  of  Jesus.  These 
were  the  "evangelists."  Some  were  oral  reciters,  others 
committed  to  writing  what  they  had  gathered,  and  so  pre- 
served the  tradition  which  was  later  to  be  worked  into  its 
present  form  by  those  whom  we  call  evangelists  par  ex- 
cellence— Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John.  Some  read  of 
this  gift  of  ministry  and  identify  it  with  the  revivalist. 
Nothing  could  be  more  different.  The  "evangelist"  did 
not  "cause  his  voice  to  be  heard  in  the  street";  he  was  a 

*  See  "The  Teacher's  Prayer-Book,"  by  Bishop  Barry,  p.  203,  where 
Barnabas  is  called  "The  Apostle  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 


128        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

shy  and  retiring  person.  But  what  do  we  not  owe  to  him ! 
It  is  to  these  gifted  men  that  we  owe  the  stories  of  the  Gos- 
pels. One  remembered  or  reported  the  account  of  those 
who  had  heard  Jesus  tell  the  story  of  the  Good  Samaritan; 
another  told  the  story  of  the  Prodigal  Son. 

Besides  those  whose  gifts  were  extraordinary  there  were 
men  who  seemed  to  have  no  gift.  They  were  not  business 
men  like  the  organizing  apostles;  not  preachers  like  the 
prophets;  they  had  no  great  memory  and  were  without 
literary  gifts;  they  were  the  "weak  things"  which  God 
chose  to  do  the  great  work  of  the  ministry.  These  undis- 
tinguished men  had  nothing  to  offer  but  a  loving  heart. 
They  became  "pastors,"  the  tender  shepherds  of  the  flock. 
They  gathered  the  little  ones  and  made  the  way  of  Jesus 
seem  easy  to  them;  they  comforted  those  in  sorrow  and 
strengthened  those  who  laid  down  their  lives  in  the  days 
of  persecution.  Like  their  Master  they  "gathered  the 
lambs  in  their  bosom  and  gently  led  those  that  were  with 
young." 

And,  lastly,  there  were  men  who  had  none  of  the  gifts 
so  far  enumerated,  but  were  men  of  unusual  intellectual 
ability.  These  men  became  "teachers."  Much  of  this 
teaching  must  have  been  monotonous  in  the  extreme. 
Many  of  the  new  converts  could  not  read  and  had  to  be 
taught  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ:  "Line  upon 
line,  here  a  little  and  there  a  little."  The  Lord^s  Prayer 
must  have  been  one  of  the  first  things  taught;  then  the 
stories  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  specially  the  Ser- 
mon on  the  Moimt;  and  then  in  time  some  simple  state- 
ment of  those  "things  which  were  most  firmly  believed" — 
a  "form  of  sound  words."  These  teachers  were  the  fore- 
runners of  that  notable  band  of  scholars,  whose  "succes- 
sors" are  in  every  church. 

This  earliest  ministry,  in  which  is  found  neither  bishop, 
priest,  nor  deacon,  is  technically  known  as  the  ministry  of 
gifts.    These  men  were  not  officials;  they  were  not  a  caste; 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY    129 

they  were  not  "clerg)mien'*;  they  were  the  representatives 
of  that  spontaneous  enthusiasm  which  followed  from  the 
conviction  that  the  Lord  who  had  died  was  alive  again 
and  was  in  communion  with  those  who  were  willing  to 
obey  him. 

Any  heathen  philosopher,  detached  from  this  enthusias- 
tic movement,  might  have  foretold  that  this  could  not  con- 
tinue. It  did  not.  But  the  miracle  is  that  the  church 
should  have  been  able  to  pass  from  this  spontaneous  min- 
istry to  an  official  ministry  without  losing  entirely  the 
glory  of  the  first.  That  this  was  done  is  due  to  the  spirit 
of  Christ  working  through  the  mighty  personality  of 
Paul. 

Very  early,  however,  in  the  history  of  the  church,  as  we 
see  from  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  a  protest  was 
made  against  the  new  "apostles."  It  was  being  claimed 
that  they  only  might  be  called  apostles  who  had  been  sent 
forth  by  Jesus  himself  or  had  been  commissioned  by  the 
Twelve  at  Jerusalem.  Against  this  Paul  vehemently  pro- 
tested. The  ministry,  he  said,  is  not  from  man  but  from 
God  direct,  and  its  credentials  are  to  be  found  in  the  work 
which  it  is  able  to  do.  Is  a  prophet  able  to  bring  souls  to 
Christ?  Then  he  is  a  minister  of  Christ.  Is  an  apostle 
able  to  establish  churches  in  which  the  name  of  Christ  is 
glorified  and  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  cele- 
brated to  the  edification  of  the  body  of  Christ?  Then 
such  an  one  is  an  apostle,  even  though  he  has  not  seen 
Jesus  in  the  flesh  nor  received  "letters"  from  the  church 
in  Jerusalem.* 

Our  s)mipathies  are  so  entirely  with  Paul  in  this  contro- 
versy  that  perhaps  we  have  failed  to  do  justice  to  "those 
at  Jerusalem."  It  may  be  that  there  was  far  more  than 
Bauer  and  other  writers  of  the  Tubingen  school  have  seen 

*  Phillips  Brooks  once  said:  "Bishop  Meade  did  not  make  me  a 
minister;  he  authorized  me  to  exercise  my  ministry  in  the  Episcopal 
Church." 


13©        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

in  this  conflict.  It  may  well  be  that  the  Twelve  at  Jeru- 
salem who  had  never  known  the  enthusiasm  of  those  who 
preached  to  the  Gentiles  felt  that  the  day  would  come 
when  this  early  enthusiasm  would  begin  to  wane,  and  that 
it  would  be  necessary  to  have  "officials"  to  carry  on  the 
work  begun  by  the  ministry  of  "gifts."*  At  any  rate, 
that  is  what  did  actually  take  place.  When  the  church, 
under  the  leadership  of  Paul,  passed  over  into  Europe,  and 
its  numbers  increased  in  a  marvellous  way,  and  men  and 
women  who  had  never  had  the  training  of  the  Jew  nor  of 
the  proselyte  were  drawn  to  the  Saviour;  when  Greeks, 
with  their  experience  of  local  independence,  were  formed 
into  congregations,  organization  now  became  as  important 
for  the  welfare  of  the  church  as  "gifts"  had  been  at  the 
beginning.  A  well-articulated  organization  was  ready  to 
the  hand  of  the  church  prepared  by  the  Roman  Empire.f 
So  the  earlier  ministry  of  which  St.  Paul  spoke  in  writing 
to  the  Ephesians  gave  way  to  a  new  ministry,  equally 
divine.  We  hear  now  of  "apostles,  prophets,  teachers, 
miracles,  gifts  of  healing,  helps,  governments j  diversities  of 
tongues."  Still  later  we  find  an  unknown  writer  speaking 
of  those  who  "resist  governments"  and  "speak  evil  of  dig- 
nitaries" as  the  enemies  of  the  Lord. 

With  the  increase  of  members  came  a  gradual  cooling  of 
the  early  enthusiasm,  and  so  a  new  problem  presented 

*  A  conflict  not  unlike  that  between  the  apostles  to  the  Gentiles  and 
*' those  at  Jerusalem"  arose  when  Wesley  inaugurated  his  revival  in 
the  English  Church.  Latitudinarians,  like  the  great  and  wise  Arch- 
bishop Tillotson,  were  suspicious  of  an  "enthusiasm"  which  violated 
all  the  conventionalities  of  the  established  church.  This  does  not  mean 
that  men  like  Tillotson  and  the  author  of  "The  Whole  Duty  of  Man" 
were  irreligious  men,  but  simply  that  they  valued  the  tradition  which 
they  had  inherited.  See  Lecky's  "History  of  England  in  the  Eigh- 
teenth Century,"  vol.  II,  pp.  560-561. 

t  Headlam  may  be  right  in  saying  that  the  episcopate  originated  in 
Asia  Minor,  in  which  case  it  probably  arose  earlier  than  I  am  inclined 
tolthink.  But  Asia  Minor  was  a  part  of  the  Roman  Empire — the 
model  on  which  the  church  founded  its  organization. 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY    131 

itself  to  the  church.  The  difficulty  now  was  not  so  much 
to  make  converts  as  to  keep  those  already  made  faithful. 
How  was  that  to  be  done  ?  If  there  were  not  enough  men 
endowed  with  the  "gifts"  which  at  the  first  were  the  proof 
of  their  ministry,  what  was  to  take  their  place?  What 
would  we  not  give  for  some  record  of  what  the  men  who 
succeeded  Paul  and  his  first  disciples  said  of  this  matter! 
We  have  no  such  record,  and  therefore  are  compelled  by 
the  exercise  of  a  sympathetic  imagination  to  guess  what 
took  place.  In  this  there  is,  of  course,  danger  of  mistake. 
But  it  is  the  only  path  open  to  us,  and  as  we  follow  it  it 
seems  to  lead  to  an  understanding  of  the  evolution  of  the 
church  which  we  can  gain  in  no  other  way.  We  venture, 
then,  to  say  that  what  probably  took  place  was  something 
like  this:  Good  and  wise  men  said  to  themselves:  "The 
church  must  be  organized.  An  official  ministry  must  take 
the  place  of  the  early  unofficial  ministry  of  the  'charis- 
mata.*" Whether  it  was  as  deliberate  as  we  have  sug- 
gested or  not,  the  fact  remains  that  this  is  what  did  hap- 
pen. The  empire  was  organized,  with  its  representative  in 
each  village  and  district.  Each  city  had  its  Decurion,  and 
over  them  was  a  consular  in  charge  of  a  large  district  called 
a  diocese.  Then  the  empire  was  divided  into  four  divi- 
sions, over  each  of  which  presided  a  prc^fect,  who  in  turn 
owed  obedience  to  the  emperor  himself.*  The  church  fol- 
lowed the  path  of  least  resistance.  The  "pastor"  now  be- 
came the  "elder  "  of  the  local  congregation.  The  "  teacher  " 
became  the  schoolmaster,  developing  finally  into  such  uni- 
versity lecturers  as  Origen  and  Clement  at  Alexandria. 
The  "prophet"  continued  to  be  what  he  had  always  been, 
a  preacher.  But  it  is  significant  of  the  deadening  influence 
of  institutionalism  that  the  prophet  tends  more  and  more 
to  disappear.  The  evangelist  became  the  chronicler  or 
scribe,  and  the  apostle  assumed  the  name  given  first  to  the 

*  See  Gibbon's  "  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,"  chap. 
XVII. 


132        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

presbyter,  and  became  known  as  the  bishop  par  excellence-* 
he  no  longer  remained  in  the  local  church,  but  became  the 
overseer  of  the  district  in  which  there  were  many  churches, 
as  the  consular  was  overseer  of  many  towns. 

This  is  the  point  at  which  the  Episcopalian  would  be 
glad  to  have  had  the  evolution  pause.  But  having  ap- 
pealed to  Caesar,  the  church  in  its  organization  had  to  go 
to  Caesar.  The  diocesan  bishop  could  no  more  retain  his 
independence  than  the  prcefect  could  be  independent  of  the 
emperor.  The  larger  divisions  of  the  empire  had  their 
prcefects  and  the  church  followed  its  example  and  placed 
archbishops  or  metropolitans  over  the  dioceses.  Here  is 
the  point  at  which  the  English  Church  paused.  But  the 
last  step  had  to  be  taken,  and  the  evolution  on  the  lines  of 
the  empire  ended  in  the  pope. 

*"The  public  functions  of  religion  were  solely  intrusted  to  the 
established  ministers  of  the  church,  the  bishops  and  presbyters — two 
appellations  which,  in  their  first  origin,  appear  to  have  distinguished 
the  same  office  and  the  same  order  of  persons.  The  name  of  presbyter 
was  expressive  of  their  age,  or,  rather,  of  their  gravity  and  wisdom. 
The  title  of  bishop  denoted  their  inspection  over  the  faith  and  manners 
of  the  Christians  who  were  committed  to  their  pastoral  care.  But  the 
most  perfect  equality  of  freedom  requires  the  directing  hand  of  a 
superior  magistrate;  .  .  .  and  the  order  of  public  deliberations  soon 
introduces  the  office  of  a  president  (and)  induced  the  primitive  Chris- 
tians an  honorable  and  perpetual  magist/y.  ...  It  was  under  these 
circumstances  that  the  lofty  title  of  bishop  began  to  raise  itself  above 
the  humble  appellation  of  presbjrter.  .  .  .  The  advantages  of  the 
episcopal  form  of  government,  which  appears  to  have  been  introduced 
before  the  end  of  the  first  century,  were  so  obvious,  and  so  important 
for  the  future  greatness  as  well  as  the  present  peace  of  Christianity, 
that  it  was  adopted  without  delay  by  all  the  societies  which  were 
already  scattered  over  the  empire.  .  .  . 

"Such  was  the  mild  and  equal  constitution  by  which  Christians  were 
governed  more  than  a  hundred  years  after  the  death  of  the  apostles. 
Every  society  formed  within  itself  a  separate  and  independent  republic. 
.  .  .  Towards  the  end  of  the  second  century  the  churches  of  Greece 
and  Asia  adopted  the  useful  institution  of  synods  .  .  .  and  the  Catho- 
lic Church  soon  assumed  the  form  and  acquired  the  strength  of  a  great 
federative  republic." — Gibbon's  "Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Em- 
pire," chap.  XV. 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY    133 

If  this  be  a  true  account  of  the  evolution  of  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  church,  the  question  naturally  arises:  ''Why 
should  the  bishops  have  been  called  the  successors  of  the 
apostles  ?''  They  are  the  "successors  of  the  apostles/' 
but  not  of  the  Twelve!  The  Twelve,  as  we  have  seen, 
were  chosen  for  a  particular  purpose  and  could  in  the  na- 
ture of  things  have  no  "successors."  But  the  "apostles" 
of  whom  Paul  speaks  and  of  whom  he  was  one  were  the 
organizers  and  overseers  of  the  churches  which  they 
founded.  When,  then,  in  the  new  or  more  developed  or- 
ganization overseers  were  appointed,  they  not  unnaturally 
took  the  title  of  "apostles." 

By  some  this  will  be  objected  to  because  it  is  a  "natural" 
explanation  of  a  divine  institution.  But  they  will  be  only 
those  who  feel  that  the  more  "natural"  a  thing  is,  the  less 
divine  it  must  be.  To  such  the  only  sacred  history  can 
be  that  of  the  Jews.  The  marvellous  story  of  man's  pil- 
grimage cannot  have  for  them  the  significance  that  it  has 
for  those  who,  with  Paul,  believe  that  God  "hath  made  all 
nations  of  men  to  dwell  on  the  earth,  that  they  might  seek 
after  him  and  find  him."  But  to  those  who  know  this,  the 
organization  of  the  church  is  no  less  divine  because  it  fol- 
lowed the  path  already  blazed  by  the  Roman  Empire,  than 
is  Paul's  journey  to  Rome  because  he  followed  the  roads 
already  built. 

But  now  look  at  it  in  the  other  way  and  call  it  "super- 
natural." It  is  equally  true  so  to  do.  It  was  the  spirit  of 
God  which  was  guiding  the  hearts  of  his  faithful  people 
as  truly  now  as  in  the  days  when  the  presence  of  that  spirit 
had  been  shown  by  the  power  to  "speak  with  tongues." 
This  activity  of  the  spirit  is  what  is  called  in  one  of  the 
collects  "the  Divine  Providence."  This  we  believe  is  what 
led  the  church  to  follow  the  example  of  the  empire  and 
build  an  organization  which  enabled  it  to  minister  to  the 
whole  body  of  Christ  throughout  the  world. 

But  the  Catholic  may  object:  "If  this  be  admitted,  how 


134        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

can  you  choose  the  point  in  this  evolution  at  which  you 
will  pause  and  say,  'Thus  far  the  spirit  of  God  guided  the 
church,  but  at  that  point  it  was  left  to  itself  V  And  if 
you  do  not  do  that,  how  can  it  be  maintained  that  the 
papacy  is  not  as  truly  the  gift  of  the  spirit  as  is  the  presby- 
tery or  the  episcopate?"  I  do  not  believe  that  any  such 
position  is  tenable.  I  believe  that  the  papacy  is  as  truly 
divine  as  is  episcopacy  or  presbytery.  But  as  the  "gift" 
of  tongues  has  ceased,  having  done  its  work,  so  the  "gift" 
of  the  papacy  may  cease  without  loss  to  the  church. 

With  this  in  mind  we  can  see  what  the  real  objection 
to  the  papacy  is,  and  how  essential  to  the  welfare  of  the 
church  the  rebellion  against  its  tyranny  became.  As  long 
as  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  was  thought  to  be  the  final 
form  of  human  society — as  Dante  thought  it  to  be — the 
papacy  was  accepted  as  a  divine  institution.*  But  every 
organization  has  a  tendency  to  become  autocratic,  and 
fatal  as  this  is  to  political  liberty,  it  is  still  more  fatal  to 
spiritual  liberty.  When  it  was  found  that  that  which  once 
had  been  the  servant  of  the  spirit  was  now  the  enemy  of 
the  saints,  the  great  revolution  came.  Because  the  organi- 
zation had  become,  to  use  modern  terms,  "full  of  graft," 
the  "independents,"  in  revolting  against  the  "machine," 
took  advantage  of  their  liberty  to  reorganize  the  church 
in  the  way  that  they  believed  would  better  serve  the  pur- 
pose of  God  in  their  day  than  the  old  organization  could 
do. 

There  are  many  angles  from  which  the  Reformation 
may  be  viewed.  It  may  be  thought  of  as  a  religious — 
that  is,  ecclesiastical,  theological,  or  moral  reformation; 
to  others  it  is  interesting  as  an  economic  or  social  develop- 
ment;   or,  finally,  it  may  be  treated  as  the  political  dis- 

*  But,  on  the  other  hand,  It  is  to  be  remembered  that  from  the  days 
of  the  Franciscans  to  Wycliff  there  were  continual  protests  against  the 
papacy,  many  of  them  identifying  it  with  the  anti-Christ  of  St.  John 
the  Divine.     See  "Studies  in  the  Apocalypse,"  R.  H.  Charles. 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY    135 

solution  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire.  There  is  much  to 
be  said  for  each  of  these  ways  of  writing  history.  But  he 
who  fails  to  see  that  it  was  primarily  the  seeking  of  a  thirsty 
soul  for  the  living  God,  fails  to  enter  into  the  secret  of  the 
human  spirit.  That  it  was  a  political  movement  no  stu- 
dent of  the  time  would  deny.  But  the  political  results 
were  by-products  of  the  religious  emancipation.  The  word 
"Protestant"  was,  of  course,  primarily  a  political  term. 
It  was  the  expression  of  the  "State  rights"  theory  of  gov- 
ernment, a  protest  against  the  centralizing  power  of  the 
empire.  It  was  the  first  step  in  the  "nationalism"  which 
was  the  necessary  successor  to  the  imperial  rule.  The 
German  reformers  believed  that  there  could  be  no  religious 
liberty  which  was  not  guarded  by  the  state,  and  as  the 
imperial  state  was  bound  up  with  the  papacy  they  ut- 
tered their  political  protest.  When  that  step  had  been 
taken  and  the  followers  of  the  Reformed  religion  were 
protected,  the  establishment  of  national  churches  was  the 
next  logical  step. 

Each  of  the  churches  of  the  Reformation  reverted  to 
one  of  the  forms  of  that  early  ministry  of  which  Paul  had 
spoken  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  The  Lutheran 
Church  exalted  the  "pastor."  The  Zwinglian  churches 
chose  the  "teacher"  as  their  model  minister.  But  the 
English  Church  said:  "We  will  retain  the  *  apostle'  or 
bishop  or  overseer."  Which  of  them  was  right?  They 
were  all  right!  Each  had  the  same  right  to  reorganize 
the  church  as  they  had  to  reorganize  the  state.  This  can 
be  denied  only  by  those  who  are  obsessed  with  the  belief 
that  there  can  be  but  one  form  of  church  government  which 
was  ordained  by  Christ  himself.  The  churches  reverted 
to  the  ministry  of  gifts  which  had  preceded  the  ministry 
of  organization,  and  each  had  an  undoubted  right  to  be 
ministered  to  by  that  one  which  seemed  best  fitted  to  edify 
the  body  of  Christ  in  the  community  in  which  they  dwelt. 
This  was  the  judgment  of  all  the  reformers  at  the  begin- 


136        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

ning.  None  of  the  Reformed  churches  questioned  the  valid- 
ity of  the  ministry  of  any  other  until  a  later  date  when 
controversy  had  succeeded  to  co-operation. 

That  this  was  the  feeling  of  the  leaders  of  the  English 
Reformation  every  student  of  the  period  knows.  The 
English  Church  retained  the  historic  ministry  that  it  had 
received  from  the  early  days  of  Christianity,  but  never 
indicated  that  it  felt  that  in  so  doing  it  had  the  only  minis- 
try approved  by  Christ.  It  admitted  to  its  pulpits  and 
altars  men  who  had  only  Lutheran,  Zwinglian,  or  Cal- 
vinistic  ordination.  For  a  hundred  years  after  the  separa- 
tion from  Rome  there  were  ministers  in  the  English  Church, 
rectors,  deans,  and  teachers  of  theology  who  were  without 
Episcopal  ordination.  Even  so  late  as  the  time  of  the  Com- 
monwealth, when  the  Calvinists  had  set  up  their  claim  to 
an  exclusive  ministry,  such  a  high  churchman  as  Bishop 
Cosin  advised  the  English  refugees  in  Paris  to  receive  the 
communion  at  the  hands  of  the  Huguenot  pastors. 

To  those  who  do  not  look  below  the  surface,  this  diver- 
sity of  ministration  seems  to  have  been  the  disruption  of 
the  unity  of  the  church.  Yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  spir- 
itual unity  of  the  churches  had  never  been  closer.  There 
were  political  and  theological  disputes  among  the  different 
churches,  but  the  essential  value  of  each  was  recognized, 
and  the  English  Church  held  communion  with  the  sister 
churches  of  Frankfort  and  Zurich  and  Geneva  as  it  does 
to-day  with  the  Episcopal  churches  of  the  colonies  and 
of  America.  It  was  not  until  the  restoration  of  Charles  II 
that  Episcopal  ordination  was  required  as  necessary  for 
ministering  in  the  churches  of  England. 

The  English  Church,  then,  retained  the  "apostolic" 
ministry,  but  recognized  the  "pastoral"  and  the  "teach- 
ing" as  of  equal  validity. 

This,  as  I  say,  is  familiar  to  students  of  the  Reformation, 
but  it  ought  to  be  more  familiar  than  it  is  to  those  who 
call  themselves  "good  churchmen,"  and  who  yet  have 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY    137 

never  taken  the  trouble  to  read  the  Thirty-nine  Articles, 
in  which  the  opinion  of  the  English  reformers  is  set  forth. 
If  we  turn  to  the  article  which  defines  the  church,  we  shall 
not  find  one  word  as  to  the  necessity  of  the  episcopate. 
**The  visible  church  of  Christ  is  a  congregation  of  faithful 
men,  in  which  the  pure  word  of  God  is  preached,  and  the 
sacraments  be  duly  administered  according  to  Christ's 
ordinance,  in  the  things  that  of  necessity  are  requisite  to 
the  same."  * 

The  same  liberal  spirit  breathes  through  the  article 
which  deals  with  the  ministry.  "It  is  not  lawful  for  any 
man  to  take  unto  him  the  office  of  public  preaching,  or 
ministering  the  sacraments  in  the  congregation,  before  he 
be  lawfully  called,  and  sent  to  execute  the  same.  And 
those  we  ought  to  judge  lawfully  called  and  sent,  which 
be  chosen  and  called  to  this  work  by  men  who  have  public 
authority  given  unto  them  in  the  congregation,  to  call 
and  send  ministers  into  the  Lord's  vineyards."  f 

On  this,  as  has  been  said,  the  English  Church  rested 
until  the  restoration  of  Charles  II,  acknowledging  that 
Lutheran,  Zwinglian,  and  Huguenot  ministers  had  all  been 
"lawfully  called  and  sent,  ...  by  men  who  (had)  public 
authority  given  unto  them  in  the  Congregation."  Then 
there  was  a  change  of  policy,  which  changed  the  Church 
of  England  into  a  church  of  Episcopalians.  This  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  Preface  to  the  Ordinal.t  "It  is  evident  unto 
all  men  diligently  reading  Holy  Scripture  and  ancient  au- 
thors, that  from  the  apostles'  time  there  have  been  these 
orders  of  ministers  in  Christ's  Church — bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons.  Which  offices  were  evermore  held  in  such 
reverent  estimation,  that  no  man  might  presmne  to  execute 
any  of  them,  except  he  were  first  called,  tried,  and 
examined,  and  known  to  have  such  qualities  as  are  requisite 
for  the  same;  and  also  by  public  prayer,  with  the  imposi- 

♦  Article  XIX.  f  Article  XXIII. 

X  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  p.  509. 


138        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

tion  of  hands,  were  approved  and  admitted  thereunto  by 
lawful  authority.  And,  therefore,  to  the  intent  that  these 
orders  may  be  continued,  and  reverently  used  and  esteemed 
in  this  churchy  no  man  shall  be  accounted  or  taken  to  be  a 
lawful  bishop,  priest,  or  deacon  in  this  church,  or  suffered 
to  execute  any  of  the  said  functions,  except  he  be  called, 
tried,  and  examined,  and  admitted  thereto,  according  to 
the  form  hereafter  following,  or  hath  had  Episcopal  con- 
secration or  ordination.''    (Italics  mine.) 

It  is  in  the  last  line  that  the  change  of  polity  is  expressed. 
Till  this  time,  as  has  been  said,  men  had  been  counted 
lawful  ministers  ''in  this  church"  who  had  not  received 
"Episcopal  consecration  or  ordination." 

It  would  take  more  space  than  can  be  given  here  to  show 
how  this  change  was  brought  about.  But  two  things  may 
be  noted:  first,  this  was  the  result  of  the  inevitable  reac- 
tion from  the  tyranny  of  the  Commonwealth,  under  which 
those  who  had  received  Episcopal  ordination  were  perse- 
cuted and  the  Prayer-Book  suppressed.  But  there  was  a 
deeper  cause  than  this.  But  before  considering  that,  it 
might  be  well  for  us  to  pause  a  moment  and  note,  that 
even  in  this  Preface  there  is  not  found  one  word  which 
claims  for  the  Episcopal  ministry  more  than  any  student 
of  history  would  be  willing  to  grant.  It  is  true  that  "from 
the  apostles'  time" — an  indefinite  period,  but  very  ancient 
— the  ministers  afterward  enumerated  had  been  found  in 
the  church  and,  therefore,  should  be  highly  esteemed.  Sec- 
ond, while  it  is  asserted  that  hereafter  "in  this  church" 
none  who  have  not  received  Episcopal  ordination  shall  be 
permitted  to  minister,  there  is  no  hint  that  the  ministers 
of  other  churches  were  not  lawfully  called  to  minister  in 
those  churches  or  that  their  ministry  was  less  " valid" 
than  the  Episcopal.  This  careful  statement  was  the  more 
remarkable  when  it  is  remembered  that  it  was  made  at 
the  end  of  a  long  controversy. 

Attention  has  been  called  to  the  fact  that  at  the  Ref- 


TtlE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY    139 

ormation  the  different  churches  reverted  to  that  primi- 
tive ministry  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks  in  his  letter  to  the 
Ephesians.  Btit  there  is  one  great  church  of  which  no 
mention  has  yet  been  made.  The  church  of  Geneva  did 
not  revert  to  the  ministry  of  "gifts,"  but  to  the  earliest 
form  of  the  ministry  of  officials. 

Calvin,  who,  though  he  was  a  layman,  had  taken  pre- 
liminary orders  in  the  Roman  Church,  and  had  been  trained 
at  the  Sorbonne — the  school  in  which  the  spirit  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages  had  been  kept  alive — ^went  to  Geneva  to  estab- 
lish his  model  church  in  the  mediaeval  spirit.  He  had  a 
theory  and  he  turned  to  the  New  Testament,  not  to  learn 
but  to  find  arguments  and  authorities  to  buttress  his 
theory.  Of  course  he  found  them.  He  was  convinced 
that  the  only  ministry  which  had  the  approval  of  the  Apos- 
toUc  Church  was  that  of  presbyters.  His  conclusion  was 
that  he  who  had  not  the  Presbyterian  ministry  had  not 
that  which  was  approved  by  the  Scriptures,  which  all  the 
reformers  were  agreed  was  to  be  the  rule  by  which  the 
church  was  to  be  tried. 

The  men  of  Puritan  tendencies  who  went  to  Geneva 
from  England  during  the  reign  of  Mary  fell  in  love  with 
Calvin's  logic  and  returned  to  England  with  Calvin's  "high 
church"  doctrine  of  the  ministry.  It  was  the  Presbyterian 
who  introduced  the  dogma  of  "apostolic  succession"  into 
the  controversies  of  the  English  Church,  and  the  result 
has  been  most  disastrous.  These  Puritans,  as  they  were 
called,  were  not  satisfied  with  the  Elizabethan  settlement, 
and  wished  to  make  a  revolution  which  would  change  the 
polity  of  the  English  Church  from  Episcopal  to  Presby- 
terian, which,  at  the  same  time,  would  have  changed  it 
from  a  comprehensive  to  a  sectarian  church. 

That  the  English  Church  was  saved  from  this  calamity 
is  due  in  no  small  measure  to  the  labors  of  one  of  the  great- 
est men  the  English  race  has  produced:  Richard  Hooker 
— to  be  known  as  long  as  the  English  Church  shall  last  as 


I40        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  "judicious"  Hooker.  What  Marshall  did  for  the  Amer- 
ican nation,  Hooker  did  for  the  English  Church.  His  great 
work  on  "ecclesiastical  polity"  is  a  classic  which  every 
churchman  should  know.  It  has  the  same  value  as  an 
interpretation  of  his  time  as  has  "The  Federalist"  in  our 
own  history. 

Calvin  represented  the  mediaeval  mind;  Hooker  repre- 
sented the  scientific  mind  as  truly  as  did  his  better-known 
contemporary,  Bacon. 

The  substance  of  Hooker's  great  argument  is  this:  "We 
should  not  go  to  the  New  Testament  to  find  proof  of  what 
we  have  already  determined  to  be  true;  we  should  go  to 
it  in  a  teachable  spirit  and  learn  what  are  the  facts.  The 
fact  is  this:  that  in  the  New  Testament  there  is  no  form 
of  church  government  so  clearly  set  forth  that  it  is  to  be 
followed  in  all  times  and  places.  Therefore,  the  churches 
are  at  liberty  to  choose  such  form  of  government  as  seems 
best.  The  English  Church  chose  to  retain  the  Episcopal, 
and  in  so  doing  did  nothing  contrary  to  *  God's  word  writ- 
ten,' but,  on  the  contrary,  followed  the  ancient  custom  of 
the  church  for  fifteen  hundred  years,  and  has  what  is  prob- 
ably the  best  ministry  that  could  be  found."  This,  he 
goes  on  to  say,  does  not  imply  that  those  who  have  another 
form  are  without  a  valid  ministry — far  from  it — though 
he  does  believe  that  while  episcopacy  is  not  of  the  "esjg," 
it  is  of  the  ^'bene  esse^^  of  the  church. 

How  wise  and  restrained,  how  filled  with  the  English 
spirit,  which  is  suspicious  of  "logic"  and  the  following  of 
a  premise  a  outrance  in  a  way  so  dear  to  the  French  mind, 
and,  therefore,  to  the  Frenchman  Calvin!  Hooker  is  as 
utilitarian  as  Paley  and  as  pragmatic  as  the  latest  psy- 
chologist, and,  therefore,  his  book  is  more  modem  than 
some  written  yesterday.  This  argument,  I  venture  to  say, 
has  now  the  approval  of  most  students  of  repute.  So  that 
the  way  is  open,  as  it  has  not  been  for  centuries,  for  the 
Reformed  churches  to  reconsider  their  positions.    But  the 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  MINISTRY     141 

English  and  Episcopal  churches  are  still  in  the  trammels 
of  mediae valism,  because  they  forsook  the  scientific  methods 
of  their  greatest  teacher,  and  took  up  with  the  revived 
mediaevalism  of  Newman  and  the  Oxford  leaders  of  the 
early- Victorian  era.  As  a  result,  there  are  many  mem- 
bers of  these  churches  who  believe,  and  alas !  teach,  that 
the  "apostolic  succession"  is  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
church  of  Hooker ! 

If  it  then  be  true  that  the  different  ministries  are  of  equal 
"validity,"  the  question  may  seem  to  be:  "Why  should 
any  church,  and  above  all  the  Episcopal  Church,  lay  such 
stress  upon  the  perpetuation  of  one  of  them  ?  Have  not 
each  of  them  shown  that  it  is  efficient,  and  is  not  that  what 
the  apostle  said  was  the  purpose  of  the  spirit  in  giving  these 
'  gifts '  of  the  ministry  ?  Were  they  not  all  for  the  '  upbuild- 
ing of  the  body  of  Christ'  ?  "  I  think  this  is  the  way  in 
which  the  question  should  be  approached.  It  is  the  true 
American  way  of  dealing  with  the  problems  of  history. 
Does  something  which  has  had  value  in  the  past  "work" 
to-day?  But  we  must  consider  the  morrow.  Will  these 
various  ministries  be  as  effective  in  the  future  as  they  un- 
doubtedly have  been  in  the  past  ?  I  doubt  it.  And  one 
reason  which  leads  me  to  doubt  it  is  that  they  have  already 
largely  been  merged  in  another  ministry  revived  in  the 
Reformation  period,  of  which  so  far  no  mention  has  been 
made. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  FUTURE  MINISTRY 

As  the  English  Church  sought  to  perpetuate  the  "apos- 
tolic" ministry,  and  the  Lutheran  the  "pastoral,"  and 
the  Zwinglian  the  "teaching,"  and  Calvin  the  first  official, 
the  "Presbyterian,"  so  the  Anabaptists  revived  the  "pro- 
phetic." The  "prophets"  of  Zwickau  were  far  removed 
from  the  preachers  Paul  had  in  mind,  but  nevertheless 
they  were  preachers  who  were  believed  to  be  filled  with  the 
spirit.  They  tended  indeed  to  take  the  form  of  Old  Testa- 
ment prophets  rather  than  of  New  Testament  preachers, 
and  seemed  to  be  more  interested  in  social  reorganization 
than  in  the  cultivation  of  "love,  joy,  and  peace."  But  this 
was  a  temporary  form  of  the  movement.  When  it  passed 
from  Germany  to  England  it  became  more  sober  and  in- 
telligent. It  did  indeed  sometimes  "revert  to  type"  as, 
for  instance,  in  the  extravagances  of  the  Latter-day  Saints 
in  the  time  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  met  the  scorn  of 
the  pragmatic  Cromwell,  but  it  profoundly  affected  the 
religious  life  of  England  both  in  the  Baptist  and  Inde- 
pendent or  Congregational  churches.  But  it  was  not  until 
it  passed  over  to  America  that  the  Anabaptist  movement 
showed  the  vitality  which  its  long-forgotten  truth  en- 
shrined. It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  "prophetic" 
ministry  revived  by  the  Anabaptist  movement  has 
triumphed  in  America.  One  proof  of  this — and  many  more 
could  be  produced — is  found  in  the  fact  that  in  more  than 
one  of  the  prominent  Presbyterian  churches  the  Presby- 
terian ministry  has  given  place  to  the  Congregational  and 
Baptist  without  either  protest  or  loss  in  spiritual  life. 

142 


THE  FUTURE  MINISTRY  143 

These  men  are  true  prophets,  and  it  is  a  shame  that  the 
Episcopal  Church  compels  its  children  who  wish  to  hear 
their  message  to  leave  their  own  churches  for  that  pur- 
pose. Its  own  pulpits  should  be  open  to  them.  But  while 
we  gladly  acknowledge  the  glory  of  this  ministry,  and  be- 
lieve it  to  be  an  essential  element  in  the  edification  of  the 
church,  we  do  not  believe  that  it  is  well  adapted  to  the 
work  which  is  opening  up  before  the  Reformed  churches 
in  a  republic  as  great  in  extent  and  population  as  that  of 
the  Roman  Empire.  We  believe  that  it  would  be  a  loss 
to  the  religious  life  of  the  republic  to  have  the  "apostolic" 
ministry  absorbed,  as  the  "pastoral''  and  Presbyterian 
ministry  are  apparently  being  absorbed  in  the  "prophetic." 
We  gladly  acknowledge  the  beauty  and  power  of  the  pro- 
phetic ministry,  but  we  must  also  recognize  its  limitations, 
unsupplemented  and  unregulated  by  the  apostolic. 

For  I  believe  that  the  task  before  the  churches  of  this 
land  to-day  is  not  unlike  that  which  the  early  church  was 
called  upon  to  meet  in  the  conversion  of  the  Roman  Em- 
pire. As  long  as  the  church  confined  its  ministrations  to 
the  great  centres — ^like  Antioch  and  Ephesus — the  pro- 
phetic ministry  was  the  leading  and  more  important  one. 
Thus,  we  read  in  the  Acts  that  "there  were  in  the  church 
at  Antioch  certain  prophets  and  teachers";  and  that  "as 
they  ministered  to  the  Lord,  and  fasted,  the  Holy  Ghost 
said,  separate  me  Barnabas  [one  of  the  prophets]  and 
Saul  for  the  work  whereunto  I  have  called  them."  This 
new  work  was  not  prophetic  but  apostolic. 

Now  look  at  the  life  of  the  churches  in  this  land.  We 
find  that  most  of  the  great  prophets  are  in  the  large  cities. 
It  cannot  be  otherwise.  The  small  town  or  village  does 
not  offer  the  field  for  their  activity.  What  then  is  the  con- 
dition of  the  small  town  which  cannot  enjoy  the  prophetic 
ministry?  Every  minister  is  supposed  to  be  a  prophet  or 
preacher,  and  is  judged  by  that.  His  people  now  journey 
to  the  great  cities  where  the  preachers  speak  to  large  crowds 


144         THE   CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

every  Sunday,  and  his  own  little  church  seems  in  compari- 
son a  paltry  thing.  We  need  not  repeat  here  what  has 
already  been  said  of  the  condition  of  the  Protestant 
churches  in  the  small  towns  *  Can  a  prophet  do  his  best 
work  in  such  an  atmosphere  ?  The  Roman  Catholic  Church 
is  filled  to  the  doors  not  once  nor  twice  only  each  Sun- 
day. I  recognize  that  there  are  motives  which  lead  Roman 
Catholics  to  church  which  we  neither  can  nor  wish  to  em- 
ploy; but,  when  all  is  said,  there  must  be  some  reason  why 
Christian  people  should  flock  to  one  kind  of  service  and 
seek  to  escape  from  the  other.  May  not  one  reason  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  we  are  attempting  to  do  work  with 
tools  which  are  not  fitted  for  the  purpose  ?  I  am  inclined  to 
think  that  this  may  be  in  part  the  cause  of  the  lamentable 
state  of  many  of  the  country  churches.  The  minister  is  sup- 
posed to  be  a  preacher  and  he  is  not.  He  might  be  some- 
where else,  but  he  cannot  be  there.  No  minister  who  recog- 
nizes the  failures  of  his  own  ministry  would  willingly  point 
out  the  failures  of  another.  But  as  I  have  listened  to  some 
of  these  pathetic  efforts  to  "prophesy,"  when  I  have  seen 
the  restlessness  of  the  children,  the  indifference  of  the  young 
— ^not  many  of  them  present  indeed — and  the  patience  of 
the  old,  whose  experience  of  life  has  been  so  much  richer 
than  that  of  the  preacher,  I  have  wondered  why  any  one 
goes  to  church !  I  may  have  been  unfortunate,  but  I  regret 
to  say  that  the  chief  burden  of  the  sermons  to  which  I  have 
listened  has  been  the  evils  of  intemperance  or  the  use  of 
tobacco;  both  of  them,  no  doubt,  subjects  which  should 
be  judiciously  touched  on  from  time  to  time,  but  a  meagre 
fare  for  the  hungry  sheep ! 

The  "prophet"  plays  a  subordinate  part  in  the  Catholic 
Church.  Only  an  occasional  sermon  is  preached,  yet,  in 
their  own  way,  there  is  brought  to  the  worshippers  the 
conviction  that  the  living  God  is  among  them  to  judge, 
to  comfort,  and  to  bless. f     Moreover,  the  priest  is  not 

*  See  above,  Chapter  IV.  f  See  below,  Chapter  XV. 


THE  FUTURE  MINISTRY  145 

simply  an  "official"  ministering  at  the  altar;  he  is  also 
a  pastor  dealing  with  the  people  through  the  confessional. 
In  spite  of  the  dreadful  abuse  of  the  confessional  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  not  a  few  earnest  Protestants 
are  beginning  to  recognize  that  nothing  is  more  needed 
for  the  welfare  of  Protestant  churches  than  a  revival  of 
the  "pastoral"  ministry — the  bringing  of  the  minister 
into  such  personal  touch  with  the  individual  as  will  enable 
him  to  counsel  and  comfort  individual  troubled  souls.  If 
the  prophet  be  a  prophet,  indeed,  he  can  make  me  feel, 
more  than  I  have  ever  felt  in  the  cathedrals  of  Italy  or 
France  or  Spain,  the  presence  of  God.  But  I  do  not  feel 
it  in  the  average  American  country  church,  and  I  have  no 
reason  to  believe  any  one  else  does. 

"But,"  it  may  now  well  be  said,  "has  the  Episcopal 
ministry  better  fruit  to  show  in  the  country  towns  ?  "  Be- 
fore I  answer  that,  I  should  like  to  say  that  I  do  not  think 
that  in  any  of  the  great  cities  of  the  land  the  pulpit  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  is  equal  in  spiritual  power  to  the  pulpit 
of  other  churches.  But  in  the  country  I  think  the 
Episcopal  Church  does  better  work.  And  the  reason  is 
that  in  the  country  it  is  not  so  dependent  upon  "prophecy." 
The  sermons  in  the  small  churches  may  not  be  great,  but 
I  believe  they  are  better  than  in  the  average  church  of 
other  names;  first,  because  they  are  shorter,  and,  secondly, 
because  as  a  rule  they  are  more  reverent  in  tone.  The 
little  ones  have  early  learned  to  take  part  in  the  service 
and  so  do  not  feel  the  tension  of  "sitting  still,"  and  the 
indifferent  are  interested  and,  let  us  hope,  instructed  by 
the  reading  of  the  Bible,  which  fills  a  larger  space  than  in 
any  other  form  of  worship.  "Well,"  it  may  be  said,  "this 
is  a  defense  of  the  liturgy,  but  has  no  bearing  on  the  minis- 
try." It  has  this  bearing,  that  the  ministry  of  the  Episco- 
pal Church,  being  not  exclusively  a  preaching  ministry,  is 
not  so  limited  in  its  appeal.  But  indeed  the  service  can- 
not be  separated  from  the  ministry.    It  is  all  part  of  a 


146        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

whole,  and  tends  to  keep  alive  a  consciousness  of  associa- 
tion with  something  larger  than  the  local  congregation. 
It  is  the  bishop,  the  representative  in  our  modern  life  of 
the  apostolic  ministry  for  which  Barnabas  and  Saul  were 
"  separated  ";  it  is  the  bishop  who  carries  to  every  little  vil- 
lage in  the  land  the  greetings  not  only  of  the  American 
church,  of  which  the  parish  is  a  part;  but  also  the  remem- 
brance of  that  larger  church  which  from  the  times  of  the 
apostles  has  been  ministered  to  by  bishops,  priests,  and 
deacons.  Every  child  is  reminded  at  his  confirmation 
that  what  is  done  when  he  is  confirmed  is  in  imitation  of 
an  apostolic  custom.  Every  communicant  is  reminded 
that  he  is  a  member  not  alone  of  the  local  church  but  of  a 
church  which,  though  relatively  small  in  numbers,  is  grow- 
ing and  increasing  in  influence,  and  his  life  is  thereby  en- 
larged. The  ministry  of  the  prophet  is  essentially  a  local 
ministry,  and  needs  to  be  supplemented  by  the  apostolic 
— universal — organizing  ministry. 

It  may  be  said  that  the  foregoing  is  scarcely  a  true  pic- 
ture of  the  average  country  church.  I  would  not  assert 
that  it  is  true  of  the  average  church,  but  I  think  it  is  fair 
to  say  that  it  is  true  of  great  numbers  of  the  Protestant 
churches.  "WeU,  even  so,''  it  may  be  answered,  ^'the 
country  church  is  not  so  spiritually  isolated  as  you  seem  to 
think.  It  does  not  have  the  oversight  of  a  chief  pastor — 
which  the  democratic  spirit  of  our  people  does  not  greatly 
care  for — ^but  it  has  its  own  bond  of  union  with  the  larger 
church  in  the  periodic  revivals  which  quicken  the  con- 
science of  the  local  church."  That  they  so  do  I  should  be 
the  last  to  deny.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  does  the  revival- 
ist deepen  the  sense  of  the  universality  of  the  church,  or 
does  he  intensify  the  sense  of  individual  responsibility  ?  I 
do  not  question  the  value  of  so  doing,  I  only  ask  if  it  can 
be  said  that  the  revivahst  does  the  same  work  as  does  the 
bishop.  Another  question  arises  here:  In  the  early  history 
of  the  country,  when  the  sense  of  individual  initiative  and 


THE  FUTURE  MINISTRY  147 

the  separatist  sentiment — especially  in  the  West  and  in  the 
South,  where  the  revivals  were  most  successful — were 
strong,  the  appeal  exclusively  to  the  individual  was  more 
congenial  than  it  is  to-day,  when  the  sense  of  the  unity  of 
the  nation  is  greater  and  the  "social  conscience"  is  being 
quickened  as  it  has  not  been  for  ages,  has  not  the  vocation 
of  the  revivalist  largely  ceased  ?  As  a  sense  of  the  impor- 
tance of  education  has  deepened,  is  there  not  need  of  some 
ministry  which  will  impress  upon  the  young  that  the  reli- 
gious life  is  a  continual  growth  in  grace  rather  than  a  sud- 
den conversion,  which  may  soon  lose  its  power  ?  It  is  upon 
this  that  the  ministry  of  the  bishop  lays  stress.  Every 
child  confirmed  is  admitted  to  the  communion — that  is,  to 
a  lifelong  education  in  truth  and  righteousness.  May  not 
the  question  then  be  fairly  asked  whether  a  ministry  which 
is  in  harmony  with  the  two  great  aims  of  the  coimtry — 
education  and  nationality — ^be  worthy  of  the  serious  con- 
sideration of  those  who  heretofore  have  thought  of  it  only 
as  a  sign  of  an  exclusive  claim  to  a  valid  ministry  ?  This 
I  believe  is  the  feeling  of  many  serious  men  who  are  as  far 
as  possible  from  the  heresy  of  the  fiction  of  the  "apostolic" 
succession. 

I  am  aware  that  this  may  be  thought  an  appeal  to  senti- 
ment and  lacking  in  that  practical  value  which  the  age 
demands.  This  may  be,  but  it  ought  not  to  be  forgotten 
that  we  are  a  people  more  filled  with  sentiment — ^which  we 
seek  to  hide  under  a  sort  of  irony — than  any  people  in  the 
world.  But  the  Episcopal  ministry  can  also  be  justified  on 
the  ground  of  utility. 

No  church  which  is  truly  comprehensive  can  dispense 
with  the  services  of  an  arbitrator.  If  there  is  to  be  wide 
difference  of  opinion  among  the  clergy,  there  must  be  some 
one  to  whom  may  be  referred  questions  which  trouble  the 
conscience  of  brethren  of  the  clergy  or  of  the  congregation. 
Such  difficulties  arise  in  every  church.  In  the  non-Episco- 
cal  churches  those  who  are  great  preachers  are  allowed 


148        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

great  liberty  because  the  congregation  would  not  lose  their 
services.  But  in  the  country  church,  where  the  position  of 
the  minister  is  often  dependent  upon  the  approval  of  some 
influential — which  often  means  rich — ^member  of  the  con- 
gregation, the  welfare  of  the  minister  and  of  his  family 
may  depend  upon  the  whim  of  some  ignorant  man  or 
prejudiced  woman.  No  system  can  entirely  guard  against 
such  tyranny.  But  it  is  certainly  an  advantage  to  the 
minister  to  have  an  arbiter  whose  judgment,  because  of  his 
office,  carries  weight  with  the  laity.  Such  an  one  is  the 
bishop.  To  him  every  minister  has  the  right  to  refer  any 
brother  clergyman  who  is  offended  by  his  utterances  or 
any  parishioner  who  is  of  the  opinion  that  his  teaching  is 
not  sound.  How  many  a  layman,  who  would  be  happy  if 
he  could  browbeat  his  minister  if  the  matter  could  be  kept 
between  themselves,  or  at  most  would  be  known  only  to 
the  local  church  which  he  largely  supports,  will  hesitate  to 
take  the  matter  to  the  bishop  and  have  the  dispute  settled 
by  authority.  The  minister,  at  his  ordination,  promises 
obedience  to  the  godly  admonition  of  his  bishop.  This 
does  not  mean  that  any  whim  of  the  bishop  is  of  divine 
origin  and  is  to  be  obeyed.  It  means  that  if  the  judgment 
of  the  bishop  can  be  shown  to  be  in  accordance  with  the 
will  of  God — and  of  that  the  individual  minister  is  the 
judge — it  will  be  followed.  But  even  if,  in  the  judgment 
of  the  individual,  the  coimsel  of  the  bishop  though  well- 
meaning  is  not  conclusive,  he  is  at  Hberty  to  refuse  to  fol- 
low it,  and  has  his  appeal  to  a  court  of  his  brethren.  How 
seldom  that  happens  shows  how  wisely  the  bishops  as  a 
rule  exercise  their  prerogative.  They  too  are  constitutional 
officers,  and  must  give  an  account  of  their  work  to  the 
laity  as  weU  as  to  the  clergy.  But  even  if  the  minister  be 
convinced  that  the  judgment  of  his  bishop  is  not  the  best, 
unless  the  question  be  one  of  morals,  he  will  be  likely  to 
yield  his  own  judgment  to  that  of  the  bishop  for  the  sake 
of  peace.    And  this  he  can  do  without  loss  of  dignity  or 


THE  FUTURE  MINISTRY  149 

the  danger  of  the  imputation  of  unworthy  motives  because 
of  the  universal  respect  for  the  office  of  the  bishop. 

But  the  presumption  is  that  it  will  be  a  "godly  judg- 
ment," first,  because  as  a  rule  the  bishops  are  mostly 
chosen  because  they  have  shown  themselves  men  of  affairs, 
i.  e.,  men  of  judgment;  and,  secondly,  because,  being  re- 
moved from  the  local  atmosphere,  they  are  better  able  to 
take  an  impartial  view  of  the  question  in  controversy. 
This  is  why  there  is  seldom  a  public  scandal  in  the  Epis- 
copal Church.  That  is  why  the  clergy  are  protected  from 
the  tyranny  of  the  laity  and  the  congregation  saved  from 
the  idiosyncrasies  of  the  minister.  The  system  is  not 
ideal,  but,  Hke  the  Constitution,  it  works.  There  are  fool- 
ish bishops,  as  there  are  conceited  presbyters  and  bump- 
tious deacons;  there  are  a  few,  no  doubt,  who  *' presume  to 
wear  an  undeserved  dignity  .  .  .,"  who 

"Do  a  wilful  stillness  entertain 
With  purpose  to  be  dressed  in  an  opinion, 
Of  wisdom,  gravity,  profound  conceit; 
As  who  should  say,  'I  am  Sir  Oracle, 
And  when  I  ope  my  lips  let  no  dog  bark,' " 

But  these  are  the  exceptions.  Taken  as  a  whole,  the 
bishops  of  the  Episcopal  Church  are  as  fine  a  body  of  men 
as  the  country  produces.  They  are  unquestionably  supe- 
rior in  character  and  wisdom  to  the  Senate,  and  compare 
favorably  with  the  federal  judges  of  the  country.  To  lose 
this  ministry  out  of  our  American  life  might  not  be  a  great 
loss  in  the  cities,  but  it  would  be  a  distinct  loss  to  the 
country  at  large. 

What  is  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  ?  It  is  this: 
No  one  of  the  historic  ministries  should  be  discarded;  no 
one  of  them  should  set  up  a  claim  to  be  the  exclusive  chan- 
nel of  God*s  grace;  each  has  its  place  and  work  in  our 
national  life;  but  I  have  laid  emphasis  upon  the  value  of 
the  episcopate  because  I  believe  if  its  utility  and  senti- 


ISO        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

mental  value  were  emphasized,  it  would  make  an  appeal  to 
many  who  are  now  deterred  from  considering  its  value  be- 
cause of  the  unwarranted  and  exclusive  claims  which  have 
been  made  for  it.  If  the  Episcopal  Church,  in  the  spirit 
of  the  great  teachers  of  the  English  Church,  were  to  say, 
*'The  ministry  of  pastors  and  prophets  and  elders  is  as 
truly  of  divine  origin  as  the  ministry  of  apostles,"  there 
would  be  a  disposition  to  consider  the  wise  words  of  the 
Prayer-Book:  "It  is  evident  to  all  men  diligently  reading 
Holy  Scripture  and  ancient  authors  that,  from  the  apos- 
tles' time,  there  have  been  these  three  orders  of  ministers 
in  Christ's  church — bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  and 
therefore  they  ought  to  be  reverently  esteemed";  and  we 
in  turn  were  to  say:  "It  is  evident  to  aU  men  diligently 
seeing  the  signs  of  the  times,  that  other  ministries  also 
have  been  the  ministers  of  Christ,  and  by  them  the  body 
of  Christ  has  been  and  is  still  being  edified";  there  would 
result  such  a  unity  of  spirit  as  to  open  the  way  for  a  freer 
co-operation  than  is  now  possible,  and,  in  time,  a  unifica- 
tion of  the  forces  of  the  church  in  such  a  way  that  without 
asking  for  the  reordination  of  those  who  have  shown  them- 
selves the  ministers  of  Christ,  the  episcopate  could  obtain 
such  a  wide-spread  trial  as  would  result  in  the  peace  and 
liberty  of  the  church  such  as  is  not  otherwise  possible. 
Under  the  leadership  of  bishops  there  might  be  an  evan- 
gelization and  edification  of  the  religious  life  of  the  coun- 
try churches  such  as  has  not  been  known  for  centuries,  and 
such  an  expansion  of  missionary  spirit  as  would  lead  to  the 
conversion  of  the  world. 

If  some  one  is  inclined  to  ask  if  one  of  the  other  forms 
of  church  leadership  would  not  lead  to  the  same  result, 
we  need  not  enter  again  into  the  controversies  of  the  past. 
I  am  aware  that  these  considerations  will  have  no  influence 
with  men  who  have  decided  that  whatever  may  be  the 
practical  advantages  of  the  episcopate  as  compared  with 
the  presbytery  or  any  other  form  of  church  government, 


THE  FUTURE  MINISTRY  151 

the  question  should  not  be  approached  in  this  utilitarian 
spirit.  Christ  himself  ordained  the  ministry  which  the 
church  must  perpetuate,  whether  that  ministry  is  suc- 
cessful or  not.  But  this  does  rot  show  that  the  argument 
is  weak;  it  only  shows  that  some  men  are  not  open  to  con- 
viction. They  are  not  open  to  conviction,  not  because 
they  are  lacking  in  intelligence  or  knowledge,  but  for  a 
deeper  spiritual  reason  of  which  we  shall  speak  later.* 
They  value  the  episcopate,  not  for  its  practical  utility,  but 
for  its  spiritual  necessity.  As  the  value  of  the  drone  in 
the  hive  is  to  be  judged  not  by  the  amount  of  work  which 
it  accomplishes  but  by  its  power  of  fertilizing  the  queen 
bee,  so  these  men  seem  to  think  that  the  value  of  the  epis- 
copate is  to  be  estimated  by  its  power  of  fertilizing  the 
church  so  as  to  bring  forth  priests  to  celebrate  a  valid  sacra- 
ment. The  Protestant  believes  in  the  virgin  birth  of  the 
ministry;  the  Catholic  insists  that  there  must  be  an  earthly 
father.  Therefore,  tables  of  genealogy  seem  to  him  to  be 
an  essential  part  of  the  church's  gospel. 

The  problem  before  the  churches  in  America  is  in  many 
ways  the  same  as  that  which  confronted  the  early  Chris- 
tian church.  As  long  as  the  question  was  one  which  con- 
cerned the  particular  locality,  one  of  the  ministries  men- 
tioned by  Paul  seemed  as  well  fitted  as  another  to  do  the 
work,  but  when  the  problem  was  to  Christianize  an  empire, 
then  the  Episcopal  form  was  found  essential.  I  believe  it 
is  the  same  to-day.  All  the  churches  in  America  are  essen- 
tially local,  not  to  say  still  colonial,  churches,  and  there  is 
no  conception  of  a  national  church — that  is,  no  conception 
of  a  united  body  which  is  able  to  bring  the  spirit  of  God 
to  bear  upon  our  political,  economic,  educational,  and 
social  life.  Every  prophet  is  doing  what  he  can  in  the  local- 
ity in  which  he  finds  himself,  but  nothing  less  than  the 
united  action  of  the  religious  life  of  America  will  suffice 
for  the  work  of  regenerating  America.  No  congregational 
*  See  below,  Chapter  XV. 


152        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

form  of  government  can  in  these  days  serve  the  need  of 
the  nation,  any  more  than  the  town  meeting,  valuable  as 
it  is  in  the  village,  can  function  in  a  great  city,  and  still 
less  in  a  State  or  throughout  the  country  at  large. 

If  there  were  in  the  churches  to-day  the  same  spirit  of 
wisdom  that  inspired  our  fathers  in  the  days  when  the 
nation  was  called  upon  to  pass  from  a  colonial  to  a  national 
form  of  government,  a  way  would  be  found  to  substitute 
for  our  provincialism  a  national  religious  life.  The  first 
duty  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  in  this  crisis  of  the  church 
and  nation,  is  to  cease  its  foolish  talk  about  its  ministry 
having  an  exclusive  privilege  ordained  by  Christ  himself, 
while  all  the  others  are  of  man's  invention  and  cannot 
give  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  We  need  to  learn  what 
it  is  our  church  has  stood  for  from  the  time  of  the  Reforma- 
tion till  the  Oxford  movement.  Hooker  and  all  the  great 
teachers  of  the  English  Church  in  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  knew  the  value  of  the  ministry  of 
which  they  were  justly  proud,  but  few  of  them  made  the 
mistake  which  the  men  who  followed  Newman — as  far  as 
they  dared  follow  him — ^made  of  taking  the  theory  of  Cal- 
vin, turning  it  upside  down,  putting  a  mitre  on  the  head 
of  the  "presiding  elder,"  and  saying:  ''This  and  this  only 
was  ordained  by  Christ." 

I  believe  that  if  the  true  teaching  of  the  English  Church 
would  be  first  learned  by  our  own  people  and  then  made 
known  to  others,  there  would  be  found  not  a  few  of  our 
brethren  of  other  churches  who  would  say:  "The  day  has 
come  when  the  prophetic  ministry  of  this  country  needs 
to  be  supplemented  by  the  apostolic  ministry."  If  that 
could  be  done,  then  we  might  look  forward  to  the  day — 
perhaps  still  far  distant — when  the  work  which  our  fathers 
began,  when  some  of  the  same  men  who  drew  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  drew  the  constitution  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  would  be  crowned  by  such  co-opera- 
tion of  the  churches  as  would  make  us  a  religious  nation 


THE  FUTURE  MINISTRY  153 

instead  of  a  nation  with  many  religious  clubs.  The  men 
who  framed  the  tabernacle  of  the  Episcopal  Church  had  a 
vision  of  a  national  church,  and  the  day  is  drawing  near 
when  we  feel  that  it  is  no  longer  a  dream  but  a  necessity. 

The  Episcopal  Church  again  follows  the  synthetic 
method.  It  seeks  to  escape  from  provincialism  by  its  form 
of  government  which  emphasizes  the  universality  of  the 
church,  but  on  the  other  hand  it  is  not  indifferent  either 
to  the  country  of  which  it  forms  a  part  nor  to  the  de- 
mocracy in  which  it  believes.  It  does  not  balk  at  the 
papacy  because  it  is  unwilling  to  take  the  last  step  in  an 
evolution  which  it  recognizes;  it  objects  to  the  papacy 
because,  though  it  admits  that  it  was  the  last  step  in 
the  evolution  of  the  historic  ministry,  it  knows  also  that 
the  papacy  so  changed  its  character  that  it  became  not 
the  servant  but  the  tyrant  of  the  church.  If  it  were  only 
a  question  of  consistency  which  is  involved,  one  might  be 
willing  to  admit  that  if  the  time  were  to  come  when  the 
nations  of  the  world  would  unite  in  an  association  which 
would  not  destroy  the  nations  forming  part  of  it,  it  might 
then  be  a  practical  question  whether  it  would  not  be  a 
feasible  and  practical  thing  to  have  a  religious  president 
of  the  churches,  chosen  not  by  a  majority  of  Italian  cardi- 
nals, but  by  some  body  which  represented  the  suffrage  of 
the  universal  church.  It  is  not  the  theory  of  the  papacy 
which  is  objected  to;  it  is  its  practical  working,  which 
has  always  been  fatal  to  democracy  unless  restrained  by 
a  large  Protestant  community. 

The  church  which  is  to  serve  America  must  be  an  Amer- 
ican church.  Neither  Italian  nor  English  nor  Scotch  nor 
Dutch  nor  German  nor  Irish.  No  church  at  present  exist- 
ing in  these  United  States  is  fitted  to  minister  to  the  life 
of  the  whole  nation.  Each  has  its  own  contribution  to 
make,  and  that  of  the  Episcopal  Church  is  not  the  least. 


CHAPTER  XII 
WORSHIP 

In  the  two  preceding  chapters  we  have  considered  the 
ministry,  which  in  ecclesiastical  language  is  technically 
known  as  the  "discipline''  of  the  church.  An  effort  was 
made  to  show,  not  that  the  ministry  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  is  the  only  valid  ministry,  or  that  others  are  with- 
out advantages  of  their  own,  but  rather  to  point  out  why, 
as  it  seems  to  some  of  us,  it  is  a  ministry  specially  adapted 
to  the  needs  of  the  present,  since  it  was  evolved  in  a  time 
not  unlike  our  own  so  far  as  the  problem  of  the  church  is 
concerned. 

In  the  same  spirit,  I  now  venture  to  set  forth  some  of 
the  reasons  which  lead  Episcopalians  to  lay  emphasis  on 
the  value  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

The  first  is  this:  they  have  learned  by  experience  that 
the  surest  bond  of  union  is  neither  doctrine  nor  discipline, 
but  worship.  They  do  not  believe  that  their  method  of 
worship  is  the  only  one  acceptable  to  our  Heavenly  Father, 
but  they  do  know  that  it  has  been  helpful  to  them,  and 
therefore  wish  that  it  should  be  given  careful  consideration 
in  any  worship  which  the  churches  might  be  inclined  to 
recommend  as  a  bond  of  union. 

John  tells  us  that,  in  his  vision,  he  was  permitted  to  be- 
hold the  heavenly  worship.  The  "four  beasts,"  which 
represent  the  powers  of  creation,  and  the  "four  and  twenty 
elders,"  the  representatives  of  humanity,  join  in  the  praise 
of  the  Creator,  to  whom  at  the  beginning,  "the  morning 
stars  sang  together,  and  all  the  sons  of  God  shouted  for 
joy."  But  this  praise  of  the  Creator  is  now  supplemented 
by  the  adoration  of  the  Lamb  who  "has  redeemed  them 
out  of  every  kingdom  and  nation  and  tribe,  and  made  them 

154 


\  WORSHIP  1 55 

kings,  and  priests  unto  God."  Then,  we  read,  an  angel 
brought  forth  the  "golden  censor,  full  of  incense,  which 
are  the  prayers  of  saints." 

What  church  can  claim  to  have  reproduced  that  heav- 
enly worship,  the  characteristics  of  which  are  eternal  awe 
and  everlasting  thankfulness?  None  can  claim  to  have 
made  its  spiritual  tabernacle  according  to  the  pattern 
shown  in  the  Mount.  Yet  may  not  the  Episcopalian  mod- 
estly say  that  his  fathers,  in  bequeathing  the  Hturgy  which 
they  had  received  from  men  of  old,  have  left  to  his  church 
a  jewel  which  they  intended  it  to  keep,  not  for  its  own 
ornament  alone,  but  as  an  heirloom  for  the  children  yet 
unborn  ?  That  is  why  they  are  not  eager  to  enter  into  a 
''religious  trust"  without  the  assurance  that  that  which 
has  a  history  far  more  wonderful  than  those  who  are  not 
familiar  with  it  would  be  inclined  to  suppose,  will  be  given 
the  consideration  it  deserves.  Many  beheve  that  even 
those  who  are  convinced,  as  many  devout  men  are,  that 
no  liturgy  can  be  the  final  expression  of  the  growing  devo- 
tion of  the  church  will,  if  they  seriously  consider  the  won- 
derful history  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  feel  that  it 
combines  to  a  great  degree  those  two  elements  of  devotion 
— awe  and  thanksgiving — ^which  are  the  essentials  of  the 
ideal  worship  as  seen  by  John  the  Divine. 

Dr.  Huntington  used  to  say  that  as  every  man  is  born 
either  a  Platonist  or  an  Aristotelian,  so  is  every  man  by 
nature  either  a  liturgist  or  an  extemporanean.  There  are 
multitudes  of  devout  people  to  whom  any  liturgy  is  a 
bondage.  They  must  pray  with  freedom  of  spirit,  pour- 
ing out  their  hearts  to  God  in  the  simple  language  of  daily 
life.  And  because,  in  their  public  worship,  they  cultivate 
the  habit  of  extemporary  prayer,  they  have  a  freedom  of 
utterance  seldom  attained  by  those  who  use  exclusively  a 
liturgy.  In  the  ideal  church  room  would  be  found  for 
both  the  formal  and  the  free.  But  because  the  latter  is  at 
present  more  popular  than  the  former,  to  abandon  the  less 


156         THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

well  known  would  be  to  lose  a  gift  to  the  church  which  has 
been  bequeathed  by  the  saints.  This  surely  would  be  an 
irreparable  loss.  But  while  it  must  be  reluctantly  ad- 
mitted that  the  exclusive  use  of  a  liturgy  has  been  accom- 
panied by  a  loss  of  freedom  in  prayer  such  as  the  non- 
liturgical  brethren  enjoy,  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  it  is 
admitted  that  this  is  the  inevitable  result  of  the  use  of  a 
liturgy.  The  wide-spread  belief  that  this  must  be  true  is 
one  of  the  reasons  why  many  are  loath  to  consider  the 
power  of  the  Prayer-Book.  Yet  President  Eliot,  no  ex- 
travagant admirer  of  our  liturgy,  once  told  me  that  he 
esteemed  Phillips  Brooks  more  wonderful  in  prayer  than 
in  preaching.  Yet  any  one  who  heard  him  pray  must 
have  noted  that  he  usually  began  with  some  well-known 
collect,  and,  using  that  as  a  "taking-off"  ground,  rose  to 
spiritual  heights  which  few  in  any  church  have  reached. 
When  Harvard  commemorated  the  sacrifice  of  her  sons  in 
the  Civil  War,  Lowell's  "Ode''  was  forgotten  in  the  splendor 
of  Brooks's  matchless  prayer*  of  resignation  and  hope, 
even  as  the  rhetoric  of  Everett  was  eclipsed  by  the  sim- 
ple eloquence  of  Lincoln's  Gettysburg  Address.  It  will 
not  do  to  say  that  this  was  an  eccentricity  of  Brooks's 
genius.  Genius  can  indeed  be  bound  by  no  forms,  but 
the  daily  enrichment  of  the  mind  by  the  thoughts  of  the  great, 
which  he  learned  by  heart,  made  Lincoln  the  master  of 
speech  he  was,  and  the  daily  communion  with  the  thoughts 
and  language  of  the  saints  gave  to  Brooks  the  power  of 
prayer.  The  children  of  the  Episcopal  Church  should  be 
the  most  powerful  in  prayer.  That  they  are  not  is  due 
not  to  the  use  but  to  the  abuse  of  the  liturgy.  It  is  be- 
cause they  do  not  use  it  intelligently  but  mechanically 
that  it  becomes  deadening  instead  of  vitalizing.  It  seems 
to  me,  then,  that  the  recalling  of  some  of  the  simplest 
facts  about  what  may  be  called  in  some  respects  the  most 

*  For  a  full  account  of  the  efiFect  of  this  prayer,  see  "The  Life  and  Let- 
ters of  Henry  Higginson,"  by  Bliss  Perry,  pp.  237-238. 


WORSHIP  157 

wonderful  book  in  the  English  language  might  be  help- 
ful to  an  understanding  of  the  love  that  the  children  of 
the  Anglican  communion  have  ^or  it,  and  perhaps  be  a 
means  of  its  introduction  to  the  notice  of  those  who, 
possibly  through  prejudice,  have  never  given  it  serious 
consideration. 

It  was  on  Whitsunday,  June  9,  1549,  that  there  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  people  of  England  the  Prayer- 
Book,  which  was  more  than  anything  else,  except  the  King 
James  version  of  the  Bible,  to  affect  the  religious  life  of 
the  English-speaking  peoples.  The  first  source  of  its  influ- 
ence was  its  catholicity.  It  was  compiled  from  the  devo- 
tional books  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  with  which 
the  people  were  already  familiar — the  breviary,  the  mis- 
sal, the  manual,  and  the  pontifical.  These  services  were 
now  combined  in  one  book  and  used,  the  first  for  daily 
prayer,  the  second  for  the  communion,  the  next  for  special 
services,  and  the  last  for  the  office  of  ordination.  For  the 
English  Church,  in  its  rejection  of  the  papacy,  did  not 
wish  to  cut  itself  off  from  spiritual  communion  with  the 
saints  of  the  Roman  Church,  therefore  many  of  the  prayers 
are  those  which  had  been  gathered  together  by  Pope  Gela- 
sius  and  had  been  said  for  centuries  in  every  church.  Much 
that  disfigured  these  books,  in  the  opinion  of  the  reformers, 
was  omitted,  but  if  what  was  drawn  from  the  Roman 
books  of  devotion  had  been  aU  the  book  contained,  it 
could  not  have  been  the  power  that  it  has  been  in  the  life 
of  the  church.  But,  indeed,  the  books  as  Cranmer  used 
them  were  not  quite  the  same  as  those  in  use  on  the  Conti- 
nent. The  English  Church  had  for  generations  been  semi- 
independent  of  Rome,  and  had  what  were  called  its  own 
"uses."  Thus  Salisbury — the  religious  centre  of  the  king- 
dom of  Wessex,  which  Alfred  the  Great  made  the  nucleus 
of  his  larger  kingdom — had  its  own  form.  York,  the  see 
city  of  the  old  Northumbrian  kingdom,  had  its  "use,''  and 
so  had  Bangor,  which  was  the  mother  church  of  those  de- 


158        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

scendants  of  the  early  British  Church  who  had  been  driven 
into  the  mountains  of  Wales,  but  never  quite  exterminated. 
So  not  only  did  the  new  service-book  perpetuate  the  ancient 
tradition,  it  also  became  the  spiritual  cement  of  the  king- 
doms which  had  at  last  found  their  political  union  under 
the  leadership  of  the  Tudors.  But  even  yet  the  whole 
story  has  not  been  told.  The  Church  of  France  had  not 
received  the  gospel  originally  from  Rome,  but  from  the 
East,  perhaps  from  the  Church  of  Ephesus.  From  Asia 
Minor  had  come  pilgrims  to  the  mouth  of  the  Rhone,  and 
gradually  the  tradition  of  the  Eastern  churches  had  fol- 
lowed the  stream  to  Lyons,  and  then  overland  to  Paris, 
and  so  through  Normandy  had  come  into  England.  Thus 
there  came  to  the  new  service  ancient  prayers  from  the 
venerable  liturgies  of  the  East.  Thus  the  closing  collect 
for  morning  and  evening  prayer  is  called  "The  Prayer  of 
St.  Chrysostom."  While  it  probably  was  not  written  by 
the  great  preacher  of  Antioch  and  Constantinople,  it  is 
evidently  an  Eastern,  that  is,  a  Greek,  prayer.  The  peti- 
tion that  God  will  grant  his  people  "in  this  world  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth  and  in  the  world  to  come  life  everlasting  ^' 
is  the  spirit  of  Greece  baptized  into  Christ,  for  the  two 
things  for  which  the  Greeks  longed  were  truth  and  Ufe. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  litany  came  from  the  Church  of 
France,  where  it  had  first  been  heard  in  the  days  when 
the  plague  devastated  the  south. 

But  while  the  compilers  of  the  new  book  naturally  and 
wisely  turned  to  the  past,  they  were  not  unmindful  of  the 
spirit  which  was  breathing  into  the  churches  of  the  day  in 
which  they  lived.  The  First  Book  of  Edward  the  Sixth — 
the  one  of  which  we  are  now  speaking — was  largely  influ- 
enced by  Luther,  who  in  Hturgics  was  far  less  hostile  to 
the  Roman  Church  than  many  of  the  later  reformers. 
But  Cranmer's  handiwork  is  the  one  which  appeals  to  us 
more  than  anything  else  in  the  book.  Many  of  the  most 
beautiful  collects  were  his,  as  for  instance  that  for.  the 


WORSHIP  159 

second  Sunday  in  Advent,  beginning,  "Blessed  Lord,  who 
hast  caused  all  Holy  Scripture  to  be  written  for  our  learn- 
ing"; so  is  the  collect  for  Trinity  Sunday.  Indeed,  most 
of  the  collects  for  Trinity  season  are  Reformation  prayers. 

The  First  Book  of  Edward  the  Sixth  was,  as  has  been 
said,  influenced  by  Luther,  with  whom  at  that  time  Cran- 
mer  was  in  sympathy.  But  the  growing  influence  of  the 
Puritans  was  not  content  with  a  book  which  differed  so 
little  from  the  Roman  books  of  worship,  and  so  in  1552 
there  appeared  the  Second  Book  of  Edward  the  Sixth,  in 
which  more  radical  changes  were  made.  It  shows  the 
Zwinglian  influence  rather  than  the  Lutheran,  for  by  this 
time  Cranmer  had  begun  to  understand  the  teaching  of 
the  reformer  of  Zurich.  While  this  book  was  temporarily 
repressed  at  the  accession  of  Mary,  it  still  remains  essen- 
tially the  book  that  is  in  our  hands  to-day. 

After  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  an  attempt  was  made 
in  1559  to  restore  the  First  Book,  but  the  Puritan  influence 
was  too  strong  for  that.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Catholics 
did  succeed  in  making  certain  changes  and,  it  is  said,  al- 
most persuaded  the  pope  to  give  his  consent  to  the  use 
of  the  English  book.  But  this  attempt  failed  because 
the  two  parties  could  not  come  to  an  agreement  on  the 
subject  of  the  royal  supremacy.  Elizabeth  might  have 
been  willing  to  restore  the  mass,  but  the  daughter  of  Henry 
VIII  had  no  intention  of  relinquishing  any  privilege  the 
crown  had  once  gained.  Nor  did  the  nobles,  even  though 
they  were  not  particularly  religious  men,  intend  to  do  any- 
thing which  might  weaken  the  new  spirit  of  Nationalism. 

In  1604  King  James  convened  the  Hampton  Court 
Conference,  and  attempted  to  bridge  the  ever-widening 
breach  between  the  two  parties.  But  it  came  to  naught. 
The  uncompromising  Puritans  were  determined  to  rule 
or  ruin — and  they  did  each  in  turn !  * 

*  Those  who  sympathize  with  the  Puritans  will  be  inclined  to  lay 
the  blame  upon  the  bishops.  Thus  Gardiner  ("History  of  England," 
vol.  I,  p.  158)  says:  "Men  whose  fame  for  learning  and  piety  was  un- 


i6o        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

In  1637  the  Catholic  party  was  triumphant,  and  Arch- 
bishop Laud  imagined  that  there  was  nothing  which  he 
with  the  approval  of  his  royal  master  might  not  accom- 
plish. But,  finding  he  could  not  have  his  will  in  England, 
he  had  the  happy  thought  to  impose  the  new  book  which 
he  had  revised  upon — of  all  people  in  the  world — the 
Scotch !  But  the  sons  and  daughters  of  the  men  who  had 
heard  Knox  preach  made  short  work  of  that,  and  Laud's 
ill-starred  effort  was  one  of  the  causes  of  his  own  betrayal 
and  the  death  of  the  king  * 

surpassed  by  that  of  any  Bishop  on  the  bench,  had  been  treated  with 
cool  contempt  by  men  who  were  prepared  to  use  their  wit  to  defend 
every  abuse  and  to  hinder  all  reform."  The  facts  do  not  justify  this 
judgment.  Bancroft,  for  example,  time-serving  courtier  though  he 
was,  recognized  the  need  of  reform  and  was  ready  to  do  all  in  his  power 
to  effect  it.  But  he  knew  that  the  real  question  at  issue  was  not  re- 
form, but  the  way  in  which  it  could  be  brought  about.  When  he  had 
convinced  the  king  that  it  was  not  reform  but  reconstruction  of  the 
church  which  the  Puritans  desired;  when  it  was  seen  that  the  aim  was 
to  displace  episcopacy  in  favor  of  the  Genevan  discipline,  there  was 
no  hope  of  agreement,  nor  would  anything  less  than  the  Presbyterian 
establishment  have  satisfied  the  Puritans.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
neither  Bancroft  nor  Whitgift  any  more  than  Hooker  claimed  that 
episcopacy  was  of  divine  origin,  but  only  that  it  was  well  fitted  for 
the  edification  of  the  church.  Instead  of  meeting  the  bishops  on 
Hooker's  and  Bancroft's  plea  of  expediency,  and  retorting  that  epis- 
copacy ought  to  be  abolished  because  it  was  inexpedient  and  did  not 
work  well,  they  (the  Puritans)  shifted  the  issue  completely  and  ap- 
pealed to  Scripture  and  to  the  early  chu/ch  fathers  to  prove  not  that 
episcopacy  was  a  bad  form  of  government,  but  that  it  had  never  been 
warranted  by  Scripture  or  by  the  practice  of  the  early  church.  Ban- 
croft retorted  that  "Even  if  episcopacy  was  not  the  God-given  scheme, 
even  if  it  did  not  work  very  well,  they  had  educed  no  reasons  for  sup- 
posing that  their  scheme  would  work  any  better.  .  .  .  The  Puritans 
treated  such  a  demand  as  supererogation.  Could  the  will  of  God  be 
at  any  time  inexpedient?  Their  scheme,  they  declared,  was  demon- 
strated by  Scripture  to  be  the  will  of  God.  .  .  .  And  yet  here  were 
these  bishops  who  did  nothing  but  prate  of  expediency!"  (See  "Re- 
construction of  the  English  Church,"  vol.  I,  book  H,  chap.  H,  by  Ro- 
land G.  Usher.)  How  completely  the  situation  has  changed !  The 
argument  for  the  apostolic  succession  has  been  taken  over  by  high 
churchmen  when  it  had  failed  the  Puritans. 

*  Archbishop  Laud  denied  at  his  trial  that  he  was  responsible  for  the 
Scotch  liturgy,  and  laid  the  blame  upon  the  intractable  Scotch  bishop)s. 
We  need  not  attempt  here  to  untangle  the  skein  of  intrigue  in  which 


WORSHIP  i6i 

In  1660  the  Savoy  Conference  was  held,  and,  though  the 
saintly  Baxter  pleaded  the  cause  of  the  Presbyterians,  the 
churchmen  were  too  embittered  to  yield  on  any  point, 
and  so  the  last  opportunity  to  heal  the  schism  was  lost. 

After  the  Restoration,  in  1660,  there  were  certain 
changes  made  in  the  book,  the  one  in  the  rubric  to  the 
ordination  service  being  the  most  important,  and  from 
that  day  there  has  been  no  change  in  the  English  book. 

In  1790  the  American  book  appeared.  Like  the  First 
Book  of  Edward  the  Sixth,  it  was  largely  the  work  of  one 
man.  As  that  had  been  compiled  by  Cranmer,  so  this 
was  the  work  of  Bishop  White.  Although  the  Preface 
states  there  is  no  desire  to  depart  from  the  English  Church 
save  as  political  conditions  made  necessary,  nevertheless 
the  good  bishop  states  that  advantage  was  taken  "of  the 
happy  opportunity"  to  make  certain  changes  which  seem 
to  Americans  an  improvement.  For  example,  the  "  Venite  " 
in  the  American  book  composed  from  the  95th  and  96th 
Psalms  makes  a  more  joyful  hymn  with  which  to  begin 
public  worship  than  does  lite  95th,  with  its  gruesome  threat 
of  never  entering  into  God's  rest. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  American  revisers  were  not 
equally  successful  in  their  treatment  of  the  "Te  Deiun." 
"Thine  honorable,  true,  and  only  Son"  is  stronger  than 
"Thine  adorable";  moreover,  a  certain  provincial  squeam- 
ishness  seems  to  have  led  to  the  change  of  "When  thou 
tookest  upon  thee  to  deliver  man,  thou  didst  not  abhor 
the  Virgin's  womb."  This  is  a  truer  translation  of  "Tu  ad 
liberandum  suscepturus  hominem  non  horruisti  Virginis 
uterum  "  than  our  somewhat  feeble,  "Didst  humble  thyself 
to  be  bom  of  a  Virgin,"  nor  is  the  meaning  of  the  latter 
phrase  quite  clear.  The  great  hymn  expresses  the  "hu- 
miliation" of  the  incarnation,  following  the  creed.    The 

the  king  and  the  archbishop  and  the  Scotch  bishops  all  had  part.  A 
fair  statement  of  the  whole  case  is  presented  in  that  excellent  book,  read 
since  this  was  written,  "The  Holy  Communion  in  Great  Britain  and 
America,"  by  J.  Brett  Langstaff,  p.  100. 


i62        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

humiliation,  it  was  believed,  consisted  in  "taking  upon  him 
the  form  of  a  servant,"  and  being  "born  of  a  woman."  It 
was  not  the  virginity  of  the  mother  but  the  reality  of  the 
humanity  of  the  Son  that  the  writer,  following  the  creed, 
desired  to  emphasize.  But  the  American  version  would 
seem  to  imply  that  birth  from  a  virgin  is  a  deeper  humilia- 
tion than  birth  from  a  married  woman,  the  last  thing  the 
holders  of  the  traditional  opinion  would  acknowledge.  But 
had  the  American  revisers  done  nothing  more  than  free  our 
book  from  the  anachronism  of  the  so-called  Athanasian 
creed,  they  would  deserve  our  thanks. 

Under  the  leadership  of  the  late  Dr.  William  R.  Hunt- 
ington the  Prayer-Book  was  again  revised,  and,  while  the 
changes  were  unimportant,  the  fact  was  significant,  be- 
cause, as  Phillips  Brooks  said,  it  showed  that  our  church 
did  not  consider  the  Prayer-Book  infallible,  and  so  opened 
the  way  for  further  changes  as  they  became  desirable.  It 
was,  however,  enriched  by  a  new  collect,  written  by  Dr. 
Huntington  for  the  festival  of  the  Transfiguration,  August 
6,  which  shows  that  the  liturgical  gift  has  not  departed. 
It  is,  I  think,  one  of  the  most  beautiful  of  the  collects. 
"That  we,  being  delivered  from  the  disquietude  of  this 
world,  may  be  permitted  to  behold  the  king  in  his  beauty," 
was  the  prayer  that  issued  from  that  study  in  Grace  Church 
rectory,  into  which  the  ceaseless  roar  of  the  trafl&c  of  Broad- 
way enters  with  disquieting  confusion. 

While  this  is  being  written,  there  is  another  revision 
in  process  in  which  there  is  a  tendency  to  revert  to  the 
First  Book  of  Edward  the  Sixth.  This  is  disquieting  to 
some,  but  it  is  what  was  to  have  been  expected,  for  it  will 
be  noted  that  each  revision  has  alternately  shown  the  in- 
fluence of  Puritan  and  Catholic. 

This  long  historical  review*  has  had  two  purposes:  first, 
to  show  that  in  this  book  of  devotion  is  embodied  the 
history  of  the  English  people,  which  is  our  history  as  well. 

*  I  have  largely  followed  Bishop  Barry's  "Teacher's  Prayer-Book." 


WORSHIP  163 

It  was  the  first  of  those  great  spiritual  bonds  of  which  the 
works  of  Shakespeare  and  the  King  James  Bible  are  the 
other  two.  But  it  should  be  remembered  that  this  one 
was  compiled  fifteen  years  before  the  gifted  child  of  Avon 
was  bom  whose  magic  wand  was  to  make  the  whole  world 
kin,  and  sixty-one  years  earlier  than  the  sonorous  trans- 
lation of  the  King  James  version. 

It  is  a  comprehensive  service-book,  the  like  of  which 
can  nowhere  else  be  found.  There  are  hymns  in  this  book 
from  the  temple  worship  at  Jerusalem,  stories  from  the 
Gospels,  letters  written  to  the  apostolic  churches;  there 
are  prayers  which  were  first  heard  when  the  little  church 
began  its  perilous  journey  from  Asia  into  Europe;  there 
are  words  of  wisdom  from  Alexandria — utterances  which 
are  the  outcome  of  Greece's  long  search  for  truth;  there 
are  solemn  warnings  from  Rome,  that  there  can  be  no  lib- 
erty which  is  not  founded  in  law,  no  freedom  which  does 
not  express  itself  in  order.  There  are  cries  of  agony  from 
France,  smitten  by  the  plague  and  threatened  by  the  Sara- 
cens. There  are  prayers  of  saints  and  martjnrs,  of 
crusaders,  and  kings  and  bishops  and  unknown  monks,  of 
reformers  and  scholars  and  simple  men  and  women. 

This  is  what  Cranmer  and  his  fellow  laborers  gave  to 
England,  hoping  it  would  be  a  spiritual  bond  to  bind  to- 
gether in  devotion  the  children  of  the  petty  little  kingdoms 
which  were  at  last  united  into  the  nation  we  call  Great 
Britain.  Little  they  dreamed  that  this  book  would  be 
carried  to  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth,  to  Canada  and 
South  Africa,  to  New  Zealand  and  Australia,  to  every 
island  in  the  seven  seas,  and  still  less  that  a  mighty  re- 
public would  arise  in  the  West  where  their  work  would 
be  received  with  joy,  and  that  this  book  would  become  a 
spiritual  bond  between  the  two  great  nations,  separated 
in  politics  but  one  in  their  ideals  and  so  one  in  love. 

The  review  of  the  various  changes  made  in  the  Prayer- 
Book,  since  the  first  book  appeared,  was  not  alone  to  show 


l64        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  historical  development  of  the  devotional  life  of  the 
English  people,  but  also  because  the  American  book  is  in  a 
sense  more  ''Catholic"  than  the  English. 

The  First  Book  of  Edward  gathered  up  the  various  ser- 
vices of  the  past  and  contemporary  devotions,  and  that  of 
the  Second  gave  the  Protestant  stamp  to  the  book,  which 
endears  it  to  us,  but,  as  we  have  seen,  with  the  exception 
of  the  changes  made  at  the  Restoration,  none  of  the  other 
attempts  to  improve  the  book  succeeded  in  England.  But, 
though  the  changes  wished  by  Elizabeth  were  not  carried 
out,  while  the  king's  supremacy  was  insisted  upon,  the 
American  book  got  rid  of  that,  owing  to  the  political  revo- 
lution. The  Hampton  Court  Conference  came  to  naught, 
fortunately  for  us,  as  well  as  for  the  English  Church.  But 
Laud's  Prayer-Book  has  had  a  curious  history,  which  is  of 
interest  to  us.  When  the  nonjurors  were  driven  from 
England,  they  found  refuge  in  the  Episcopal  Church  of 
Scotland,  and  Laud's  book  was  in  accordance  with  their 
ecclesiastical  notions.  Now,  when  Dr.  Seabury  went  to 
England,  seeking  consecration  at  Lambeth,  he  was  rejected 
because  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  king  was  essential. 
So  to  Scotland  he  went  and  was  consecrated  by  the  suc- 
cessors of  the  nonjurors.  But  one  of  the  conditions  was 
that  he  should  use  his  influence  to  have  the  prayer  of  con- 
secration in  the  communion  service  incorporated  into  the 
American  book.  So,  by  a  strange  irony  of  fate,  the  book 
which  the  Puritans  refused  to  listen  to  in  England  was 
adopted  in  this  particular  by  their  children  in  this  country ! 
I  do  not  think  it  can  be  denied  that  this  prayer  is  nobler 
than  the  corresponding  one  in  the  Enghsh  book.*    Indeed, 

*  Nevertheless,  it  would  probably  have  been  better  had  what  is 
called  The  Prayer  of  Acceptance,  beginning,  "Wherefore,  O  Lord  and 
Heavenly  Father  ..."  been  placed  after  the  reception  of  the  com- 
munion, as  expressing  the  will  of  the  communicant,  strengthened  by 
the  reception  of  the  sacrament,  to  offer  and  present  soul  and  body  as 
a  reasonable  (that  is,  spiritual),  holy,  and  living  sacrifice  unto  God. 
See  "The  Holy  Communion  in  Great  Britain  and  America,"  J.  Brett 
Langstaff,  p.  65. 


WORSHIP  i6s 

while  objection  has  been  raised  against  it  on  the  ground 
that  it  savors  of  the  doctrine  of  the  mass,  a  careful  exam- 
ination will  show  that  it  has  much  of  the  spirit  of  the 
ancient  Greek  liturgies  in  which  the  fruits  of  the  earth  are 
offered  in  thanks  to  the  Giver  of  all  good.* 

The  failure  of  the  Savoy  Conference  was  the  cause  of 
much  of  the  weakness  of  the  English  Church  in  the  days 
which  foUowed.  But  many  of  the  suggestions  made  by 
the  Presbyterians  have  been  incorporated  in  the  American 
book.  The  Preface  to  the  Prayer-Book  refers  to  the  Savoy 
Conference  as  "the  great  and  good  work  which  miscarried 
at  that  time,"  showing  that  while  the  compilers  of  the 
American  book  were  willing  for  the  sake  of  peace  to  accept 
the  changes  suggested  in  Archbishop  Laud's  book,  they 
were  rather  in  S3mipathy  with  the  Presbyterian  revisers  of 
1689. 

Some  years  ago  a  distinguished  layman  of  one  of  the 
non-liturgical  churches,  in  addressing  a  meeting  of  Episco- 
pal ministers,  remarked  that  the  use  of  a  liturgy  was  an 
"intellectual  economy."  This  was  not  so  wise  a  saying  as 
one  would  have  looked  for  from  such  a  wise  man.  The 
objection  would  be  equally  true  of  the  art  of  the  actor  who 
interprets  Shakespeare.  Doubtless  there  would  be  con- 
siderable intellectual  extravagance  on  the  part  of  the  actor 
who  attempted  to  improvise  an  expression  of  Hamlet's 
vacillation,  or  lago's  craft,  or  Portia's  plea.  But  would 
the  result  be  to  move  the  spectators  to  "terror  and  pity"  ? 
The  art  of  interpretation  is  a  high  form  of  intellectual,  as 
well  as  emotional,  activity.  It  is  because  this  is  forgotten 
that  so  little  is  done  to  train  the  ministers  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  dramatic  art,  and,  as  a  consequence,  the 
liturgy  is  rendered  dull,  monotonous,  and  unintelligible. 
But  who  has  listened  to  the  devotional  rendering  of  the 
solemn  burial  service,  or  the  still  more  solemn  marriage 
service,  or  (in  spite  of  serious  blemishes)  the  lovely  bap- 
*  This  was  the  opinion  of  Bishop  White.    See  ibid,^  p.  208. 


i66        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

tismal  office,  without  feeling  that  the  "depths  were  broken 
up"  ?  It  is  said  that  those  who  heard  Frederick  Maurice 
pray  the  familiar  morning  and  evening  prayers  felt  as 
never  before  that  they  were  in  the  presence  of  God. 

Of  course  there  is  danger  in  approaching  the  divine  lit- 
urgy in  the  dramatic  spirit.  It  may  become  *' theatrical" 
and  degenerate  into  what  has  been  called  "histrionic  in- 
sincerity," but  the  same  danger  lurks  in  all  public  prayer. 
It  becomes  "theatrical"  when  the  auditors  are  the  object 
of  attention — as  in  the  many-times-told  story  of  the 
"most  eloquent  prayer  ever  addressed  to  a  Boston  audi- 
ence." But  it  is  devoutly  "dramatic"  when  the  minister, 
in  solemn  awe,  interprets  the  awful  tragedy  of  sin  and 
redemption,  as  in  the  presence  of  God. 

In  all  Episcopal  churches  there  may  be  fotmd  three  types 
of  worshippers:  the  "Catholic,"  who  would  have  the  lit- 
urgy resemble,  as  far  as  possible,  the  mass — the  less  in- 
telligible it  is,  the  more  devout  it  is  supposed  to  be;  the 
"Protestant,"  who  is  indifferent  to  the  "preliminary  exer- 
cises" in  hope  of  an  interesting  sermon;  and,  lastly,  those 
who  used  to  be  called  "Prayer-Book  churchmen."  To 
these  last  the  sermon  is  of  no  great  consequence;  it  is  the 
service  they  love.  They,  I  believe,  represent  the  large 
majority  of  the  laity.  Many  of  the  clergy  value  the  Epis- 
copal Church  chiefly  because  they  believe  that  it  alone 
of  the  Reformed  churches  enjoys  a  valid  ministry  and  has 
kept  the  "faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints";  but  the  laity, 
while  not  entirely  indifferent  to  these  considerations,  were 
originally  attracted  to  and  have  been  held  in  loving  alle- 
giance to  the  church  because  they  find  spiritual  delight  in 
the  Prayer-Book.  Doubtless  they,  like  all  of  us,  have  the 
"defects  of  their  qualities,"  and  are  unwilling  to  see  one 
jot  or  tittle  of  the  Prayer-Book  changed.  It  is  they  who 
hold  their  church  back  from  ministering  to  the  people  ac- 
cording to  the  needs  of  the  present.  They  little  guess  that 
they  are  hindering  the  scribe  in  his  efforts  to  bring  out  of 


WORSHIP  167 

his  treasure  things  new  as  well  as  old.  There  are  prayers 
in  the  book  which  few  have  ever  heard,  because  they  are 
embedded  in  unfamiliar  services,  such  as  the  visitation  of 
the  sick,  the  consecration  of  churches,  and  the  family 
morning  and  evening  prayer.  These  might  be  brought 
out  into  the  Sunday  service  to  the  enrichment  of  the  lit- 
urgy. But  there  are  many  prayers  not  found  in  the  lit- 
urgy which  might  from  time  to  time  be  substituted  for  the 
appointed  prayers  with  advantage,  such  as  certain  of 
Bishop  Wilson's,  Cardinal  Newman's,  Stevenson's,  and 
Washington's  noble  prayer  for  the  nation:  "Almighty  God: 
We  make  our  earnest  prayer  that  thou  wilt  keep  the 
United  States  in  thy  holy  protection;  that  thou  wilt  in- 
cline the  hearts  of  the  citizens  to  cultivate  a  spirit  of  sub- 
ordination and  obedience  to  the  government,  and  enter- 
tain a  brotherly  affection  and  love  for  one  another  and  for 
their  fellow  citizens  of  the  United  States  at  large.  And, 
finally,  that  thou  wilt  most  graciously  be  pleased  to  dispose 
us  all  to  do  justice,  to  love  mercy,  and  to  demean  ourselves 
with  that  charity,  humility,  and  pacific  temper  of  mind 
which  were  the  characteristics  of  the  Divine  Author  of  our 
blessed  religion,  and  without  a  humble  imitation  of  whose 
example  in  these  things  we  can  never  hope  to  be  a  happy 
nation.  Grant  our  supplication,  we  beseech  thee,  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  Amen."  *  And,  above  aU,  there 
should  be  restored  the  ancient  Hberty  of  the  "prophet," 
described  in  the  apostolic  constitution,  to  leave  the  lit- 
urgy and  break  forth  into  spontaneous  prayer,  "as  the 
spirit  gives  him  utterance." 

Besides  enrichment  there  should  be  retranslation.  There 
are  obsolete  words  which  have  radically  changed  their 
meaning  since  the  days  of  Shakespeare,  and  so  mislead 
the  people.    Such  words  as  "prevent"  and  "take  no  care 

*  I  am  indebted  for  a  copy  of  this  prayer  to  the  Hon.  Roland  Mau- 
rice, of  Philadelphia,  who  informs  me  that  it  is  used  every  Sunday  in 
the  Memorial  Chapel  at  Valley  Forge. 


i68        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

for"  and  "person"  are  not  only  confusing  but  the  last 
positively  heretical.  Both  rubrics  and  public  opinion  hin- 
der such  changes.  But  suppose  the  non-liturgical  churches 
were  to  use  the  book  with  greater  freedom  than  is  allowed 
its  custodians,  can  it  be  doubted  that  there  would  be  a 
deepening  of  the  spiritual  Hfe  as  the  sense  of  individual 
dependence  was  enlarged  by  the  consciousness  of  the  unity 
of  Christ's  body  ?  "0  God,  we  have  heard  with  our  ears 
and  our  fathers  have  declared  unto  us  the  noble  works 
that  thou  didst  in  their  days  and  in  the  old  time  before 
them."  It  is  not  without  significance  that  Edward  Ever- 
ett Hale,  in  his  moving  tale  of  "The  Man  Without  a 
Country,"  should  have  depicted  PhiKp  Nolan  lying  dead, 
with  the  "Episcopal  Prayer-Book  open  at  the  prayer  for 
the  President  of  the  United  States." 

Are  we  not  justified  in  saying,  in  no  sectarian  spirit, 
that  this  is  indeed  a  wonderful  book  ?  Are  we  not  right 
in  treasuring  it,  not  as  an  exclusive  privilege  but  as  the 
heirloom  of  the  American  people?  Are  we  not  justified 
in  believing  that  if  it  were  seriously  considered  by  those 
who  have  never  examined  it,  it  might  be  a  bond  of  union 
because  it  brings  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men  together 
at  the  throne  of  God?  We  who  have  learned  from  it  and 
have  used  it  these  many  years  think  of  it  as  "a  golden 
censor  filled  with  incense,  which  are  the  prayers  of  saints." 


CHAPTER  XIII 
DOCTRINE 

A,    The  Faith  of  the  Church 

We  have  now  reviewed  the  theory  of  the  ministry  and 
the  manner  of  worship  which  divide  instead  of  unite  the 
churches. 

We  have  now  to  consider  the  doctrine  of  the  church, 
and  immediately  we  are  met  with  the  objection  that  here 
lies  the  insuperable  barrier  to  the  unity  of  Christian  people. 
"Would  it  not  be  better,''  it  is  frequently  said,  **if  the 
churches  were  to  agree  to  dispense  with  doctrine,  on  which 
men  can  never  agree,  and  unite  in  good-will  and  helpful 
works  that  would  benefit  mankind?"  But  the  first  ques- 
tion we  should  ask  is:  Is  there  as  much  difference  as  is  com- 
monly supposed  between  the  churches  on  the  subject  of 
doctrine  as  there  is  on  the  ministry  and  manner  of  wor- 
ship? I  think  quite  the  contrary  is  true.  While  on  the 
question  of  discipline  and  worship  the  differences  are  acute, 
it  will  be  found  that  the  Greek,  the  Roman,  and  the  various 
Protestant  churches  are,  with  one  small  exception,  agreed 
that  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Christian  religion  is 
the  Trinity  of  the  One  God.  We  have  not,  then,  to  con- 
sider now,  as  previously,  the  question.  Why  should  not 
the  Episcopal  Church  abandon  that  which  the  large  ma- 
jority of  our  fellow  Christians  in  this  land  have  already 
abandoned?  but,  rather,  Why  should  not  all  the  churches 
in  America  follow  the  example  of  that  small  but  never- 
theless highly  intelligent  body  of  disciples  who  have  cast 
aside  as  unreasonable  the  doctrine  which  the  great  ma- 
jority still  hold,  and  with  them  devote  themselves  to  an 
increase  in  the  knowledge  of  science  and  the  improvement 

169 


I70        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

of  humanity  in  those  matters  which  it  is  in  their  power 
to  influence  ? 

If  this  were  a  new  movement  in  the  history  of  the  church, 
it  might  be  supposed  that  at  last  the  truth  had  been  dis- 
covered, and  that  all  we  had  to  do  was  to  follow  it.  But, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  very  old.  That  is  to  say,  it  has 
been  tried  more  than  once  in  the  history  of  the  church, 
and  the  result  has  never  been  what  its  promoters  fondly 
expected. 

The  Arian  schism  in  the  fourth  century  differs  in  many 
important  respects  from  the  later  anti-Trinitarian  move- 
ments; but  it  has  this  in  common  with  them  all,  that  it 
denied  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  unique  partaker  of  the  di- 
vinity of  the  Father.  The  result  of  that  opinion  was  tested 
when  the  Mohammedan  invasion  ravaged  the  churches  of 
the  East,  northern  Africa,  and  southern  Europe.  The 
Arian  churches  could  not  endure  the  fiery  trial.  Not  that 
they  were  less  devout  or  less  courageous  than  the  Catholics, 
but  because,  when  it  came  to  a  question  of  life  and  death, 
it  did  not  seem  worth  while  to  die  for  an  opinion  which 
after  all  did  not  affect,  in  their  view,  the  essential  of  the 
faith,  which  was  the  unity  of  God.  The  Mohammedan 
believed  that  as  truly  as  did  the  Catholic — ^perhaps  more 
truly — therefore,  the  Arians  did  not  fall  martyrs  to  the 
faith,  they  were  absorbed  into  Islam.  It  may  be  said  that 
the  same  is  true  of  the  Eastern  churches.  Undoubtedly, 
but  what  is  significant  in  the  lapse  of  those  churches  is 
that  Christ  as  a  "living,  breathing,  feeling  man"  had  given 
place  to  a  phantom  in  which  men  could  not  trust  when 
the  test  came.  Apollinarianism  led  to  the  Monophysite 
heresy,  and  that  in  turn  to  the  Monothilite.  Whatever 
truth  these  heresies  enshrined,  and  unquestionably  they 
did  stand  for  a  vital  truth,  nevertheless  the  man  Christ 
Jesus  disappeared  in  a  mist  of  speculation.  Men  will  not 
die  for  a  dogma  but  only  for  the  faith.  Much  as  we  may 
dislike  the  phraseology  of  the  so-called  Athanasian  creed. 


DOCTRINE  171 

it  is  nevertheless  true,  as  has  been  finely  said,  that  the 
*^Quicunque  vuW  was  the  Marseillaise  of  the  early  French 
Church*  The  men  who — not "  rightly,"  as  it  is  erroneously 
translated,  but  "firmly" — ^held  the  Catholic  faith  died 
that  Europe  might  not  become  as  Turkey.  They  died  for 
Christ  because  they  believed  Christ  to  be  as  truly  human 
as  themselves  and  as  divine  as  the  Father. 

The  question  now  is  not  whether  they  were  right  or 
vnrong;  nor  whether  they  were  able  to  express  their  faith 
in  a  formula  which  meets  our  approval,  but:  Why  did  the 
church  which  had  done  so  fine  a  missionary  work  in  the 
conversion  of  the  Barbarians,  which  saved  Europe  by  mak- 
ing its  invaders  Christian  and  brought  them  to  a  condition 
where  they  were  able  to  absorb  the  religion  and  civilization 
of  Europe,  fail,  when  the  Catholics  met  the  wave  of  the 
Saracen  invasion  like  a  rock?  The  dramatic  check  of  the 
Barbarians  by  Pope  Leo  I  has  been  the  subject  of  pic- 
ture and  pen,  but  the  obscure  work  of  the  early  Arian  mis- 
sionaries which  alone  made  the  Barbarians  responsive  to 
the  church's  appeal  has  been  forgotten. f 

In  the  sixteenth  century  the  Socinian  current  in  the 
Reformation  flood  had  elements  which  have  enriched  and 
purified  the  life  of  all  the  churches.  But  it  was  unable 
to  satisfy  the  longing  of  the  human  soul  for  a  gospel  of 
redemption.  Socinianism  protested,  and  we  believe  rightly, 
against  the  Calvinistic  doctrine  that  man  was  so  far  gone 
from  "original  righteousness"  that  nothing  less  than  the 
sacrifice  of  the  sinless  Son  of  God  could  placate  the  wrath 
of  his  offended  Father.  We  call  this  the  Calvinistic  doc- 
trine 0!  atonement,  but  indeed  it  was  part  of  the  damnosa 
hereditas  which  Proteatantism  had  inherited  from  the 
mediaeval    church.     A   pit)test   against    the    Protestant 

•  "Christ's  Thought  of  God,"  J.  M.  Wilson. 

t  Attila,  of  course,  was  a  Hun,  that  is,  a  heathen,  but  a  very  con- 
siderable part  of  the  army  which  he  led  into  Italy  was  nominally  Chris- 
tian.   See  Chapter  II. 


172        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

scholasticism  was  needed  and  the  church  should  be  grate- 
ful to  Socinus  for  making  it;  but  what  Socinus  and  his 
followers  overlooked  was  that  the  world  cannot  be  saved 
by  a  protest,  it  must  have  a  gospel  of  salvation.  Whatever 
may  or  may  not  be  necessary  for  redemption,  it  is  redemp- 
tion which  the  world  needs.  It  was  because  it  failed  to 
lay  hold  of  the  truth  that  the  holiness  of  God  is  the  essen- 
tial element  in  the  divine  nature  that  Socinianism  became 
an  arid  intellectualism,  and  so  failed  to  appeal  to  the  con- 
science of  the  churches  of  the  Reformation. 

The  Deistic  movement  of  the  eighteenth  century  refused 
to  believe  in  the  divinity  of  Jesus  because  the  argument 
on  which  the  church  thought  it  necessary  to  base  it — the 
power  of  working  miracles — ^made  no  impression  upon 
men  like  Hume,  who  were  convinced  that  the  finger  of 
God  had  never  touched  this  earth  since  the  hand  of  God 
made  man  out  of  the  dust  of  the  ground  and  then  left  him 
to  his  own  devices ! 

In  its  noblest  and  most  spiritual  form  the  anti-Trini- 
tarian protest  appeared  in  England  and  New  England  in 
the  eighteenth  century  as  Unitarianism.  Who  can  esti- 
mate the  debt  the  churches  of  every  name  owe  to  the 
men  and  women  of  the  Unitarian  faith  ?  The  Calvinistic 
churches  had  degraded  Christ  by  making  him  a  mere  in- 
strument for  the  placating  of  a  God  who  was  spiritually 
"muscle  bound,"  and  had  not  the  power  which  every  good 
man  possesses  of  freely  forgiving  those  who  have  done 
him  wrong.  Moreover,  they  failed  to  see  that  God's  hatred 
of  sin  was  not  because  of  any  offense  to  his  divine  majesty 
but  because  sin  is  the  destruction  of  the  divine  life  in  God's 
child.  It  was  the  Unitarian  Church  which  showed  us  the 
Father  by  revealing  the  Son  as  friend  and  example,  making 
him  appear  before  us  as  a  "living,  breathing,  thinking 
man,"  in  whose  companionship  we,  like  the  disciples  of 
old,  could  feel  at  home  with  God.  At  the  time  of  the  Uni- 
tarian revolt  from  what  was  called  the  Orthodox  Church 


DOCTRINE  173 

in  New  England,  the  knowledge  of  God  was  expressed 
much  in  this  way:  "God  is  arbitrary  Will;  he  can  do  what 
he  pleases;  and  he  did  please  to  choose  a  certain  number 
to  be  saved  out  of  this  world,  but  even  there  he  was  limited 
and  in  order  to  accompKsh  his  purpose,  it  was  necessary 
to  subject  his  Son,  the  Sinless  One,  to  an  excruciating  and 
shameful  death  in  order  that  his  own  heart  might  be  moved 
to  love  sinners."  Now,  inasmuch  as  the  whole  doctrine 
of  the  divinity  of  Christ  was  at  that  time  based  on  the 
necessity  of  the  vicarious  punishment  of  the  Son  of  God, 
when  the  moral  revolt  of  the  Unitarians  against  that  doc- 
trine, unworthy  of  God  because  unworthy  of  man,  oc- 
curred, the  divinity  of  Christ  fell  with  it,  because  it  was 
the  only  proof  with  which  they  were  familiar.  No  one  who 
knows  the  history  of  the  churches  in  this  land  can  doubt 
that  every  one  of  them  owes  a  great  debt  to  the  Unitarian 
protest  which  literally  brought  Christ  back  into  the 
church.*  As  Dean  Rashdall  has  said:  "Modern  Unitarian- 
ism  was  originally  quite  as  much  a  protest  against  the 
traditional  doctrine  of  the  Atonement  as  against  the  tradi- 
tional doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  The  value  of  these  protests 
must  be  acknowledged  by  all  who  feel  how  deeply  the  tradi- 
tional views  have  libelled  the  view  of  God's  character  which 
finds  expression  in  the  teachings  of  Christ  and  in  a  truly 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation.''t 

It  is  popularly  supposed  that  this  libel  originated  with 
Calvin  and  was  cast  into  its  rigid  form  by  Jonathan  Ed- 
wards, but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Calvin,  the  great  French 
lawyer,  took  part  of  the  theory  from  Anselm,  who  in  turn 
had  borrowed  from  St.  Augustine;  so  that  the  record  of  this 
doctrine  is  not  to  be  found  in  Calvin's  "Institutes,"  but 
rather  in  Anselm's  "Cur  Deus  homo,"  the  tract  of  St. 

*  I  owe  this  to  the  late  Prof.  A.  V.  G.  Allen,  though  I  cannot  at  the 
moment  verify  the  reference. 

t  "The  Idea  of  Atonement  in  Christian  Theology,"  Hastings  Rash- 
dall, p.  43  (Macmillan  &  Co.). 


174        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

Augustine  against  Pelagius,  and  St.  PauFs  rabbinical  teach- 
ing in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 

But,  while  all  the  churches  should  gladly  acknowledge  the 
debt,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Unitarian  churches  are 
not  only  becoming  smaller,  through  some  failure  to  appeal 
to  plain  people,  but  also  that  their  own  children  are  leav- 
ing them  and  are  many  of  them  agnostic  in  their  philoso- 
phy>  and  not  a  few,  ignorant  of  the  first  principles  of  the 
life  of  Christ,  are  living  on  their  spiritual  capital  in  the 
vain  hope  that  the  ethics  of  the  gospel  will  survive  when 
the  Master  who  gave  the  new  law  of  life  with  its  sanctify- 
ing power  is  thought  of  as  a  myth.  The  God  of  Unitarian- 
ism  tends  inevitably  to  become  an  individual  removed  from 
the  universe,  a  conception  which  modem  science  has  made 
it  impossible  for  thoughtful  men  to  hold. 

Not  a  few  earnest  Unitarians  acknowledge  this,  but  com- 
fort themselves  with  the  thought  that  the  reason  their 
church  is  losing  ground  is  due  to  the  fact  that  its  message 
is  now  being  preached  by  other  churches.  There  is  truth 
in  this.  All  the  churches  have  been  influenced  by  the 
Unitarian  movement,  but  they  were  able  to  absorb  it  and 
make  it  vital  because  they  have  learned  that  the  essential 
truth  in  it  is  a  forgotten  truth  which  in  no  way  conflicts 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  One  most  important 
effect  that  Unitarianism  has  had  upon  the  Trinitarian 
churches  has  been  to  drive  them  to  examine  their  faith  as 
expressed  in  the  ancient  formulas  and  ask  themselves  what 
these  formulas  really  mean. 

The  Unitarian  believes  them  to  teach  a  plurality  of 
gods.  Therefore  he  will  say:  "Supposing  it  to  be  true  that 
the  Unitarian  protests  have  failed  to  convert  the  church, 
it  does  not  follow  that  the  truth  for  which  the  Unitarian 
stands  is  weak,  but  that  it  is  in  advance  of  the  time.  The 
pragmatic  test  is  not  the  final  one.  If  what  we  believe  to 
be  true  is  not  convincing,"  says  the  Unitarian,  "it  may  be 
due  to  the  fact  that  the  church  is  unable  to  receive  the 


DOCTRINE  175 

'truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.'  We  are  convinced  that  the  unity 
of  God  was  taught  by  Jesus,  and  that  the  church,  under 
the  influence  of  Greek  speculation,  has  fallen  away  from 
the  *  faith  once  deUvered  to  the  saints.'" 

This  is  indeed  a  serious  charge  and  deserves  our  most 
careful  consideration.  Whether  the  statement  that  the 
churches  fell  away  from  the  early  faith  be  true  or  not,  it  is 
certain  that  the  reformers  did  not  believe  that  to  be  the 
fact.  They  made  not  the  general  councils  but  the  Scrip- 
tures the  final  appeal.  If  the  decisions  of  the  councils 
were  contrary  to  the  teaching  of  the  Scripture,  then  the 
churches  should  not  be  bound  by  them.  This  is  particu- 
larly true  of  the  English  Church,  as  a  reference  to  the 
articles  will  show.*  May  it  not  be  that  our  Unitarian 
brethren  have  misunderstood  the  teaching  of  the  church  ? 
This  would  not  be  strange,  if  it  be  true,  as  it  undoubtedly 
is,  that  many  who  call  themselves  Trinitarians  have  un- 
questionably misunderstood  it. 

Turn  to  the  faith  of  those  who  call  themselves  Trini- 
tarians. What  is  it  they  really  believe  ?  If  we  speak  the 
truth  we  must  admit  that  many  of  them  are  really  tri- 
theists — that  is,  polytheists.  They  have  lost  the  first  ele- 
ment of  the  faith  of  Jesus,  that  the  "Lord  our  God  is  one." 
They  are  really  worshipping  three  gods.  They  visualize 
the  Father  as  a  venerable  man,  sitting  on  a  throne  some- 
where above  the  sky.  The  Saviour  who  hung  upon  the 
cross  they  think  of  as  sharing  the  Father's  throne — another 
man — ^and  the  third  they  find  it  difficult  to  make  an  image 
of,  and  so  try  to  satisfy  themselves  with  the  figure  of  a 
dove,  or  else  dissolve  it  into  the  atmosphere.  So  it  has 
come  to  pass  that  the  unity  of  God  has  largely  departed 
from  the  popular  theology  of  the  day.  There  are  not  a 
few  devout  Christians,  not  only  among  the  laity  but  among 
the  clergy  as  well,  who  would  be  glad  if  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trim'ty  were  not  dwelt  upon  on  Trinity  Sunday.  They 
*  See  Articles  XX  and  XXII,  Prayer-Book,  pp.  561,  562. 


176        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

feel  instinctively  that  something  is  wrong,  and  though  they 
desire  to  hold  the  ancient  faith,  they  wish  they  might  hold 
it  in  some  way  that  did  not  call  for  discussion  or  definition. 
Yet  there  is  only  one  question  to-day  to  which  mankind 
seeks  an  answer,  and  tiat  is:  "How  are  we  to  think  of 
God?" 

Let  us  foUow  the  invitation  of  the  Unitarian  and  turn 
to  the  teaching  of  the  Bible.  As  we  open  the  Old  Testa- 
ment we  find  that  the  earliest  thought  of  God  was  very 
crude  but  entirely  natural — that  is,  what  was  to  be  expected 
from  a  people  who  wished  to  live  with  their  God.  God 
was  conceived  as  an  heroic  man.  He  was  beHeved  to  be 
interested  in  the  Jews  alone.  The  Jews  shared  the  com- 
mon belief  of  the  people  of  their  day.  Each  nation  had  its 
God  as  Israel  had.  Jehovah  dwelt  on  Mount  Sinai,  and 
the  Jews  believed  that  on  one  occasion  Moses  penetrated 
into  the  very  presence  of  God  and  saw  him,  and  that  God 
with  his  finger  wrote  on  the  tables  of  stone  the  law  which 
they  believed  was  the  expression  of  the  Divine  Will. 

This  belief  continued  for  centuries.  Then  in  the  time 
of  the  great  prophets,  a  nobler  conception  of  God  came  to 
holy  men.  Isaiah  says:  "In  the  year  that  King  Uzziah 
died  I  saw  the  Lord,  great  and  lifted  up,  and  his  train 
fiUed  the  temple."  God  no  longer  dwelt  on  Mount  Sinai, 
he  dwelt  in  the  heaven  of  heavens.  His  law  was  not  con- 
fined to  the  Holy  Land,  as  Jonah  had  thought;  he  was  the 
Lord  of  the  whole  earth,  though  in  Jerusalem  alone  could 
he  be  rightly  worshipped.  The  transcendence  of  God  had 
now  banished  or  was  slowly  driving  out  the  earlier  thought 
of  a  local  God. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah  another  prophet 
took  up  the  theme.  He  lived  more  than  a  century  and  a 
half  later  than  the  prophet  whose  name  we  have  given  to 
the  whole  book.  He  had  been  through  the  great  experi- 
ence of  the  Exile.  He  had  found  God  in  the  uttermost 
parts  of  the  earth,  after  the  temple  had  been  destroyed, 


DOCTRINE  177 

and  he  writes:  "Thus  said  the  high  and  holy  one  which 
inhabiteth  eternity,  I  dwell  in  the  high  and  lofty  place, 
with  him  also  that  is  of  a  humble  and  contrite  heart." 
What  a  revelation  of  God's  glory  had  come  to  Israel  when 
the  prophet  could  speak  of  God  as  indeed  in  the  heaven  of 
heavens  and  yet  also  in  the  contrite  heart  of  the  humblest 
soul! 

This  is  the  thought  of  God  in  which  Jesus  was  trained 
and  from  which  we  believe  he  never  departed.  I  do  not 
say  there  may  not  be  found  expressions  in  the  gospel  which 
might  lead  us  to  believe  that  our  Saviour  shared  the  earlier 
and  cruder  conception  of  God,  but  such  we  believe  to  be 
the  reflection  of  those  who  failed  to  enter  into  the  secret 
chambers  of  his  soul.  John  tells  us  that  when  Jesus  came 
to  Samaria,  where  men  were  worshipping  a  God  who  dwelt 
on  their  moimtain  as  the  Jews  were  worshipping  a  God 
who  they  believed  dwelt  on  Mount  Zion,  he  said:  *'That 
is  not  the  way  to  worship  God.  He  does  not  dwell  here 
or  there.  God  is  spirit";  that  is,  like  the  atmosphere, 
penetrating  every  part  of  life.  We  then  are  not  to  think 
of  God  as  having  form,  any  more  than  the  air  we  breathe. 
We  are  not  to  think  of  him  as  dwelling  apart  from  the  uni- 
verse, but  as  permeating  all  life.  So  the  divine  life  is 
really  to  be  found  wherever  there  is  life.  Eternal  life  is 
manifesting  itself  in  myriad  forms. 

This  thought  of  God  is  as  far  removed  from  the  popular 
Trinitarianism  as  it  is  from  the  popular  Unitarianism.  It 
is  indeed  a  thought  in  which  each  can  find  itself  at  home. 

Children  repeat  the  experience  of  the  race.  The  chil- 
dren to-day  think  of  God  as  a  great  man  dwelling  apart 
from  the  universe  from  all  eternity,  and  then  some  day  de- 
ciding to  make  the  world.  This  is  unworthy  of  the  mature 
Christian.  He  should  think  of  God  as  eternal  life,  no  more 
confined  by  time  than  by  space.  We  are  to  think  of  eter- 
nal life  as  manifesting  itself  in  the  stars,  in  the  hills  *'in 
verdure  clad,"  in  the  fish  of  the  sea,  the  fowls  of  the  air, 


178        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  creeping  things  on  the  earth,  and,  above  all,  in  man, 
different  from  all  other  creatures  in  the  fact  that,  so  far  as 
we  know,  he  alone  is  conscious  of  failure,  yet  hopes  and 
dies  in  faith.  AU  are  manifestations  of  the  spirit,  who  is 
God. 

This  thought  is  so  closely  allied  to  Pantheism  that  it 
is  often  mistaken  for  Pantheism.  And,  indeed,  if  it  be 
unsupplemented  by  other  thoughts  of  God,  to  that  it  must 
come.  And  if  it  come  to  that,  then  there  will  be  a  falling 
away  from  that  ethical  idea  of  God  which  was  the  ground 
of  Jesus*  revelation. 

So  we  are  driven  to  ask  ourselves  what  we  can  know  of 
the  character  of  this  divine  "atmosphere."  That  question 
arose  among  the  Twelve.  Philip  spoke  not  only  for  him- 
self and  for  the  Twelve,  but  for  us  as  well  when  he  said: 
"Lord,  show  us  the  Father  and  it  suflSceth  us."  "What  is 
this  spirit  like,  that  you  call  Father?  What  is  its  char- 
acter? If  we  knew  that,  we  should  be  content."  We  feel 
the  same.  Jesus  said:  "He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen 
the  Father  also."  What  does  that  mean,  except  that  the 
character  of  God  is  like  the  character  of  Jesus?  And  what 
does  that  mean  except  that  the  character  of  God  can  only 
be  fully  revealed  in  man?  Something  of  the  glory  of  God 
is  revealed  in  nature.  But  the  heart  of  God  can  only  be 
revealed  by  man.  By  man?  By  what  man?  Jesus  dares 
to  say  what  we  should  never  dare  to  say  of  ourselves  nor 
of  the  holiest  we  have  known,  that  God  is  like  him.  If 
we  follow  the  teaching,  we  shall  find  that  Jesus  is  saying, 
not  once  or  twice:  "You  love,  you  obey  me,  you  trust 
me,  you  know  that  I  am  about  to  sacrifice  myself  for  you, 
you  believe  that  I  am  going  to  prepare  an  eternal  home 
for  you,  you  are  convinced  that  no  matter  how  often  you 
fail  me  I  will  never  fail  you.  You  know  that  I  have  been 
going  about  among  the  outcasts  seeking  to  save  the  lost. 
Now  believe  that  it  is  God  who  is  doing  all  this.  Believe 
that  I  am  dwelling  in  the  Eternal  Spirit,  and  that  what  I 


DOCTRINE  179 

do  in  this  short  space  of  time  and  on  the  little  stage  of  Judea 
where  God  first  spoke  to  Abraham,  God  my  Father  has 
ever  been  doing  and  will  ever  do.  I  dwell  in  the  Eternal 
Spirit  and  it  dwells  in  me.  It  is  this  that  gives  me  power. 
Yet  the  power  you  see  is  nothing  compared  with  the  eternal 
power  of  the  Father  who  is  greater  than  I.  You  call  me 
good,  but  my  goodness  is  but  a  faint  reflection  of  the  per- 
fect and  complete  holiness  of  God."  Jesus  never  called 
himself  God.  Perhaps  he  spoke  of  himself  as  the  Son  of 
God,  certainly  the  evangelists  so  spoke  of  him — the  per- 
fect manifestation  of  the  eternal  as  far  as  such  manifes- 
tation is  possible  in  a  perfect  human  being.  Now,  to  speak 
of  this  as  delegated  power  or  goodness  is  to  misunderstand 
the  meaning  of  Jesus'  life.  It  was  not  delegated,  as  if  his 
life  was  alien  to  that  of  God,  it  was  manifested  because  his 
character  was  essentially  the  same  as  the  character  of  God. 
But  it  is  neither  power  nor  self-satisfied  goodness  which 
is  the  ultimate  characteristic  of  God.  It  is  love.  God  is 
love  and  he  who  dwelt  in  love  as  no  other  life  has  ever  done, 
God  also  dwelt  in  him  as  in  no  other.  "We  have  seen," 
says  John,  "the  glory  of  the  only-begotten  of  the  Father, 
and  it  was  true  and  gracious."  From  that  day  God  the 
mighty  became  the  father  to  all  those  men  who  had  known 
Jesus,  and  they  found  rest  to  their  souls.  They  did  not 
speculate  about  God,  they  did  not  seek  for  proofs  of  God's 
existence,  they  knew  God  and  foimd  that  they  had  eternal 
life. 

But  how  few  were  they  who  came  into  contact  with 
Jesus!  About  one  hundred  and  twenty,  we  read  in  the 
Acts,  were  assembled  in  his  name  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 
But  that  little  company  had  a  knowledge  of  God  that  made 
them  different  from  any  people  who  up  to  that  time  had 
lived  upon  the  earth.  For  those  who  had  received  Jesus 
as  their  Lord  and  Master  knew  God  not  only  as  the  eternal 
upholding  power  of  the  universe,  but  also  as  love  com- 
muning with  them.    What  now  was  to  be  the  fate  of  those 


i8o        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

who,  never  having  had  the  privilege  of  the  first  disciples, 
were  to  live  in  the  time  to  come?  Jude,  we  are  told,  was 
troubled  by  this  question  and  asked  Jesus  to  answer  it: 
"Lord,  how  is  it  that  thou  wilt  manifest  thyself  unto  us 
and  not  unto  the  world?"  And  Jesus  said:  "I  will  mani- 
fest myself  unto  the  world.  If  any  man  love  me,  my  Father 
will  love  him,  and  we  will  come  to  him  and  dwell  with  him." 
How  far  John's  account  is  to  be  taken  as  the  ipsissima 
verba  of  Jesus  and  how  far  as  the  expression  of  the 
church's  experience  need  not  be  considered  here.  The 
essential  thing  is  that  it  reveals  the  expanding  influence 
of  the  principle  taught  by  Jesus.  What  interests  us  in 
this  connection  is:  How  was  this  promise  fulfilled,  or  how 
did  this  experience  arise?  The  first  disciples  had  found 
that  God  dwelt  in  them  while  they  were  in  fellowship  with 
Jesus,  but  Jesus  was  about  to  depart;  who  could  do  for 
those  who  came  after  what  Jesus  had  done  for  them  ?  They 
said  that  Jesus  had  told  them  that  it  would  be  by  the  minis- 
tration of  the  Holy  Spirit.  If  any  man  loved  Jesus,  his 
Father  would  love  him  as  the  disciples  of  Jesus  knew  he 
loved  them,  and  into  his  life  would  come  a  new  spirit  which 
would  mak'e  him  feel  at  home  with  God,  as  the  disciples 
of  Jesus  had  felt  at  home  with  God.  Paul,  who  lived  to 
see  the  fulfilment  of  this  promise,  wrote  wonderful  words 
when  he  said:  "No  man  can  say  that  Jesus  is  Lord  but 
by  the  Holy  Ghost."  What  that  means,  I  think,  is  that 
just  as  only  the  Divine  can  reveal  the  Divine,  so  only  the  Di- 
vine can  recognize  the  Divine.  It  was  because  Jesus  was 
uniquely  divine  that  he  could  reveal  God  to  man,  and  it 
is  because  there  is  in  every  man  something  of  the  divine 
that  man  is  able  to  recognize  that  revelation. 

This,  I  believe,  is  the  faith  in  which  all  Christians j  what- 
ever they  may  call  themselves,  really  live.  It  is  not  so  much 
the  faith  as  the  expression  of  the  faith  about  which  we 
differ.  But  I  do  not  think  it  ought  to  be  difficult  for  those 
who  believe  in  the  Trinity  of  the  One  God  to  express  their 


DOCTRINE  i8i 

belief  in  simple  language.  We  do  not  believe  in  three  gods; 
we  believe  in  one  God.  But  we  are  confident  that  in  order 
to  know  that  one  God  as  fully  as  it  is  possible  for  man  to 
know  him,  he  must  be  experienced  in  the  three  manifes- 
tations which  we  call  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  Our 
faith,  we  believe,  is  the  same  as  the  faith  of  Jesus.  Note 
I  say  our  faith.  The  creed  of  Jesus  was  the  expression  of 
his  faith  in  the  familiar  language  knowledge  of  God;  and 
while  we  know  that  simple-hearted  men  and  women  can 
eat  of  that  fruit  and  enjoy  God  without  any  knowledge  of 
the  mystery  of  this  universe,  yet  we  also  know  that  edu- 
cated men  and  women  who  have  devoted  a  vast  deal  of 
time  and  thought  to  the  elucidation  of  the  mystery  of  this 
universe  cannot  rest  satisfied  without  some  understanding 
of  the  creeds  in  which  their  faith  was  formulated. 

There  are  a  few  who  will  agree  with  this  but  yet  will 
say:  "Why  could  not  this  faith  have  remained  in  the  un- 
formulated state  in  which  the  New  Testament  leaves  it? 
But,  as  that  was  not  done,  why  can  we  not  return  to  those 
primitive  days  and  discard  the  creeds  which  are  unfamiliar 
and  obscure?"  The  answer  is  that  we  cannot  get  rid  of 
the  history  of  the  church,  and  begin  our  lives  to-day  as 
if  that  history  had  never  been.  What  we  ought  to  do  is 
to  ask  ourselves  what  those  men  of  old  were  trying  to  ex- 
press, and  then  go  on  to  ask  if  it  be  not  possible,  without 
breaking  with  the  past,  to  hold  the  faith  and  at  the  same 
time  rejoice  in  the  larger  knowledge  which  we  have  been 
permitted  to  acquire. 

See,  then,  what  it  was  which  the  church  of  the  fourth 
century  had  in  mind  to  do.  It  had  to  express  Jesus'  faith 
in  God  in  a  form  that  would  satisfy  the  Greek  mind,  which 
was  asking  questions  which  the  Jew  would  not  have  under- 
stood. Just  as  in  the  development  of  the  ministry  the 
church  followed  the  road  which  the  genius  of  Rome  had 
built,  so  in  its  theological  development  it  followed  the 
lines  already  traced  by  Greek  philosophy.    We  value  the 


i82        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

organization  because  we  believe  it  was  developed  under 
the  influence  of  the  Divine  Spirit;  we  value  the  creeds 
because  we  believe  that  here  too  the  spirit  was  making 
its  influence  felt.  We  do  not  feel  that  the  organization 
is  of  such  binding  force  that  it  may  not  be  changed  if  in 
changing  times  another  form  is  found  better  fitted  to  the 
days  in  which  we  live.  That  would  be  to  deny  that  the 
spirit  is  still  abiding  in  the  church.  In  the  same  way  we 
do  not  think  the  creeds  are  of  such  authority  that  the 
church  is  not  at  liberty  to  express  its  living  faith  in 
the  intelligible  language  of  this  day;  that  would  be  to 
deny  that  the  spirit  is  still  leading  the  faithful  into  the 
truth. 

If,  however,  we  ask  what  form  such  a  new  creed  should 
take,  we  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  while  the  ancient  creeds 
might  with  advantage  be  simplified,  if  we  depart  from 
the  ancient  faith  in  the  Trinity  of  God  we  shall  find 
that  we  have  failed  to  satisfy  the  deepest  longing  of  the 
soul. 

For,  far  as  we  seem  to  have  travelled  from  the  fourth 
century,  the  problems  of  life  have  not  essentially  changed. 
The  church  of  the  fourth  century  found  itself  face  to  face 
with  different  theories  of  the  divine.  There  was  the  pop- 
ular belief  in  ^'gods  many";  there  was  the  Stoic  belief  in 
the  one  God  whose  will  was  omnipotent  and  in  opposition 
to  it  man  was  helpless;  and  there  was,  coming  in  from  the 
East,  the  Pantheistic  conception  of  God  which  included 
all  life,  but  was  lacking  in  holiness  of  character.  Each  of 
these  represented  a  truth,  but  no  one  of  them  alone  satis- 
fied the  soul  of  man.  The  church  believed  that  Jesus' 
revelation  of  God  would  satisfy,  and  it  attempted  to  formu- 
late its  faith  with  these  needs  in  mind.  The  result  was  the 
so-called  Nicene  Creed.  Stoicism's  demand  for  a  God 
over  all,  who  made  and  upholds  the  universe,  was  answered 
in  the  declaration  that  God  is  our  Father  and  Creator. 
The  polytheistic  demand  for  a  God  who  partook  of  the 


DOCTRINE  183 

likeness  of  man  was  met  by  the  assertion  that  the  man 
Christ  Jesus  was  of  the  same  substance  as  the  Father.  And 
Pantheism  found  something  congenial  in  the  doctrine  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  which  is  the  giver  of  life.  Are  these  de- 
mands obsolete?  Do  we  not  find  to-day  the  same  feeling 
manifesting  itself  in  strange  forms?  Pantheism  is  a  wide- 
spread belief  to-day  in  America,  even  though  some  of  its 
adherents  have  never  heard  the  word.  Stoic  philosophy 
is  the  religion  of  many  a  noble  soul  to-day  as  it  was  of  old; 
and  William  James,  the  most  popular  of  modern  philosophic 
teachers,  has  intimated  that  Polytheism  is  a  living  faith. 
Is  this  a  time  for  the  churches  to  say  that  the  need 
for  dogma  has  passed  ?  There  is  need  to-day  for  the  church 
to  state  with  authority  what  its  faith  is.  But  that  author- 
ity must  be  more  august  than  that  of  the  councils.  It 
must  be  the  authority  of  Jesus,  who  spoke  with  authority 
because  he  spoke  words  that  answered  to  the  needs  of  the 
soul,  and  the  soul  responded  to  his  message  and  verified 
it  by  experience. 

I  say  that  I  believe  that  this  truth  is  recognized  by 
thoughtful  men  in  every  church,  and  that  this  faith  in  God 
as  Trinity  is  the  faith  by  which  all,  consciously  or  sub- 
consciously, are  living.  I  believe  that  the  real  difficulty 
lies,  not  in  the  faith,  but  in  the  popular  misapprehension 
of  the  faith.  This  is  the  way  the  objection  expresses  it- 
self: "We  understand  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is 
that  there  is  one  God  in  three  persons.  Then  if  God  be  a 
'person'  he  too  is  an  individual.  There  cannot  then  be 
three  individuals  in  one."  But  what  has  been  overlooked 
in  this  syllogism  is,  first,  that  God  is  not  an  "individual." 
If  he  be,  then  we  have  the  deistic  God,  in  whom  science 
is  making  it  impossible  to  believe.  "Is  God,  then,  not  a 
person?"  The  answer  is:  "No,  if  by  person  be  meant  a 
solitary  being."  The  personality  of  God  is  greater  than 
human  personality.  And  that  is  what  the  fathers  were 
trying  to  say  when  they  spoke  of  the  Triune  Personality  of 


i84        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

God  *  In  the  second  place,  the  word  "  person  "  has  changed 
in  meaning  so  completely  that  it  means  in  common  speech 
the  very  opposite  of  what  the  creeds  affirm.  An  analogy 
to  this  is  found  in  the  changed  meaning  of  the  word  "pre- 
vent." Every  student  of  EngHsh  literature  knows  that 
in  the  sixteenth  century  the  word  "prevent"  meant  "to 
go  before  in  order  to  facilitate,"  whereas  now  it  means  "to 
go  before  in  order  to  frustrate."  Let  us  imagine  an  his- 
torical writer  describing  the  battle  of  Antietam  without 
explaining  in  what  sense  he  used  the  word  "prevent." 
See  what  the  confusion  of  the  modem  reader  would  in- 
evitably be  on  reading  such  a  statement  as  this:  "On  the 
17th  of  September,  1862,  McClellan  ordered  Bumside  to 
move  promptly  at  eight  o'clock  and  to  march  to  the  Poto- 
mac in  order  to  prevent  the  capture  of  the  whole  Rebel 
army  by  the  Federal  troops."  Would  it  not  be  supposed 
that  McClellan  was  seeking  to  aid  Lee's  escape  ?    But  the 

*"God  is  a  personal  being — 'superpersonal,'  if  we  like  to  say  so, 
but  at  least  personal — as  a  person  making  his  will  known  to  us,  and 
demanding  of  us  that  we  should  deal  with  him  as  with  a  person,  at 
once  our  unerring  Judge  and  our  loving  Father."— "Belief  in  God," 
Bishop  Gore,  p.  134. 

"Mr.  Clement  Webb  ('God  and  Personality,*  Allen  &  Unwin,  191 8, 
p.  6i)  has  recently  said  that  *it  was  in  connection  with  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  that  the  words  person  and  personality  came  to  be  used  of 
the  Divine  Being,*  and  that  though  personality  in  God  is  the  orthodox 
Christian  doctrine,  to  speak  of  the  personality  of  God  has  a  suggestion 
of  the  Unitarian  heresy.  Now,  it  is  true  that  the  terms  for  personality, 
whether  in  Greek  or  Latin,  were  only  elaborated  in  this  connection. 
But  Christianity  felt  the  importance  of  personality,  both  in  man  and 
in  God,  before  it  found  a  term  to  express  the  idea.  And  the  personality 
of  the  one  God  was  surely  a  central  idea  of  the  prophetic  religion  which 
Christianity  inherited  long  before  any  question  was  raised  about  per- 
sonal distinction  in  the  Godhead." — Ibid.,  p.  114. 

Not  a  few  devout  souls  are  adverse  to  predicating  the  personality  of 
God  because  they  conceive  personality  only  as  a  limitation.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  if  the  personality  of  God  be  denied,  there  is  no  possi- 
bility of  communion  between  God  and  man.  Therefore,  it  seems  best 
to  speak  of  personality  in  God,  because  we  have  no  other  term  by  which 
we  can  express  that  spiritual  experience  which  we  call  the  communion 
of  the  soul  with  God. 


DOCTRINE  185 

archaic  writer  would  really  be  trying  to  say  that  the  object 
of  McClellan^s  order  was  to  faciL'tate  the  capture  of  the 
Confederate  troops.  If  the  word  "person"  is  to  be  used 
at  all,  it  is  essential  that  it  should  be  clearly  understood  in 
what  sense  it  is  used.  If  it  be  supposed  that  in  the  andent 
formularies  of  the  faith  the  word  "person"  is  used  in  the 
modem  sense,  it  leads  inevitably  to  tritheism. 

Atkanasius  and  the  Nicene  fathers  would  have  been  hor- 
rified had  they  been  told  that  they  had  set  forth  a  doctrine 
that  stated  that  there  were  three  individuals  in  the  God- 
head. They  would  have  seen,  as  we  do,  that  it  would 
have  been  like  saying  that  three  disciples — Peter  and 
James  and  John — ^were  one  Jesus !  But  is  the  substance  of 
the  Godhead  personal  or  impersonal  .'*  If  it  be  personal 
the  objection  has  no  force.  Is  it,  then,  impersonal  ?  If 
so,  it  means  that  it  is  a  mysterious  Ufe  differentiated  into 
three  self-consciousnesses  or  minds.  But  how  does  this 
differ  from  polytheism  except  by  the  arbitrary  limitation 
of  the  gods  to  three?  "Monotheism  was  saved  by  Atha- 
nasius  and  the  Council  of  Nicaea;  and  more  and  more,  since 
that  turning-point  in  the  development  of  doctrine.  Chris- 
tian thought  has  abandoned  the  way  of  looking  at  the 
Persons  of  the  Trinity  as  distinct  minds  acting  in  co-opera- 
tion. The  Catholic  theory  of  the  Holy  Trinity — as  formu- 
lated by  St.  Augustine,  and  in  a  still  clearer  and  more 
philosophical  form  by  St.  Thomas  Aquinas — represents 
that  God  is  One  Consciousness,  One  Mind — a  Trinity  of 
Power,  Wisdom,  and  Will  or  Love — ^which  together  consti- 
tute one  self-conscious  Being."  *  If  personality  in  the 
popular  sense  of  the  term  be  predicated  of  the  Godhead, 
it  leads  inevitably  either  to  tritheism  or  to  Unitarianism. 
But  the  word  is  not  so  used  in  the  creeds. 

The  modem  study  of  psychology  has  shown  that  "per- 
sonality is  something  not  in  essence  singular  but  plural."  f 

*  "The  Idea  of  Atonement  in  Christian  Theology,"  Hastings  Rash- 
dall,  dean  of  Carlisle  (Macmillan  &  Co.,  1920),  p.  444. 
t  J.  F.  Bethune-Baker. 


i86        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

And  that  means  that  the  "man  in  the  street"  has  no 
clear  understanding  of  the  meaning  of  personality.  If 
embryonic  hmnan  personality  is  plural,  how  much  more 
must  this  be  true  of  the  one  Perfect  Personality,  which 
is  God.  Therefore  it  would  be  better  to  speak  of  "per- 
sonality in  God"  rather  than  of  the  "personality  oj 
God." 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  confusing  formula  does  not 
occur  in  the  Nicene  Creed.  It  came  into  the  liturgy  from 
the  so-called  "Athanasian  Creed,"  which  is  not  a  creed 
and  was  not  written  by  Athanasius.  The  word  "person" 
occurs  twice  in  the  services  of  the  Prayer-Book.  In  the 
litany  we  say:  "O  holy,  blessed,  and  glorious  Trinity, 
Three  Persons  and  One  God."  In  one  of  the  prefaces  in 
the  communion  service  for  Trinity  Sunday  we  say:  ''Who 
art  one  Lord,  not  only  one  person  but  three  persons  in  one 
substance.  For  what  we  believe  of  the  glory  of  the  Father 
the  same  we  believe  of  the  glory  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  without  any  difference  or  inequality."  This 
is  a  very  ancient  statement.  It  is  taken  from  tiie  Sarum 
Missal,  which  came  from  the  Sacramentary  of  Pope  Gela- 
sius  (450  A.  D.)  and  was  drawn  by  him  from  a  still  earh'er 
Greek  mass.  No  one  can  understand  what  it  means  who 
is  not  familiar  with  the  Greek.  How  many  of  the  laity 
have  the  time  or  inclination  for  such  research  ?  Therefore, 
in  the  American  book,  a  second  Preface  was  inserted  as  an 
alternative  far  better  fitted  for  public  worship:*  "We  give 
thanks  unto  thee,  Holy  Father,  Almighty  and  Everlasting 
God,  for  the  precious  death  and  merits  of  thy  Son,  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord,  and  for  the  sending  to  us  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  Comforter,  who  are  one  with  thee  in  thy  Eter- 
nal Godhead."  Now,  inasmuch  as  the  American  compilers 
of  the  book  stated  that  it  was  not  their  intention  to  depart 
from  the  doctrine  of  the  English  Church,  it  must  be  as- 

♦  See  "The  Holy  Communion  in  Great  Britain  and  America,"  J.  Brett 
Langstaff,  p.  239. 


DOCTRINE  187 

sumed  that,  in  their  judgment,  the  second  Preface  is  the 
equivalent  of  the  first.  If  they  are  right,  then  the  word 
''person''  cannot  have  the  meaning  in  the  liturgy  which  it 
has  in  common  speech.  And  this  judgment  is  justified  by 
an  examination  of  the  Greek  word  which  appears  in  our 
liturgy  as  "person."  We  get  it  from  the  Latin  ''persona," 
whidi  means  a  mask,  that  is,  the  visible  sign  through 
whidi  the  sound  of  the  voice  of  the  actor  came.  These 
masks  were  put  on  by  the  actor  to  play  a  certain  part — a 
father  or  a  hero  or  a  lover,  as  the  case  might  be.  But  the 
compilers  of  the  creed  were  careful  to  say  that  they  did 
not  think  of  these  "masks"  as  being  put  on  and  off  by  the 
Divine  Actor;  that  was  the  error  of  SabeUius.  Rather 
they  conceived  them  to  be  essential  elements  in  the  Divine 
Nature.  "Persona"  was  a  translation  of  the  Greek  word 
"hypostasis,"  for  which  there  is  neither  Latin  nor  English 
exact  equivalent.  It  means,  as  near  as  we  can  guess,  first 
"reality,"  then  "distinction,"  and  then  "manifestation." 
So  that  we  feel  justified  in  saying  that  what  the  ancient 
creeds  meant  to  teach  was  that  God  must  not  be  thought 
of  as  a  solitary  individual,  having  no  present  relation  to 
the  world,  but  that  he  is  to  be  thought  of  as  Eternal  Spirit, 
from  all  eternity  having  distinctions  which  are  manifested 
in  the  threefold  revelation  of  God  to  man  as  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit,  and  that  each  of  these  manifestations  is 
equally  divine.  Jesus,  then,  is  not  to  be  thought  of  as  a 
"second  God,"  nor  the  Holy  Spirit  as  merely  an  influence 
— ^more  or  less  diluted — but  that  when  we  commune  with 
the  Father  or  the  Son  or  the  Holy  Spirit  we  commune  with 
the  Eternal  Godhead. 

The  English  Church  deserves  high  praise  for  having 
taken  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  out  of  the  mists  of  meta- 
physics and  placed  it  where  it  was  intended  to  be,  in  the 
atmosphere  of  ethics. 

It  would  probably  be  more  consonant  with  modem 
thought  to  speak  of  three  "voices"  rather  than  three 


i88        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

"persons"  in  the  Divine  Unity.*  The  voice  of  the  Father 
is  heard  in  the  storm,  indeed,  but  also  in  the  salient  setting 
of  the  sun,  and  in  all  the  scenes  of  beauty  which  deck  the 
earth  and  makes  us  feel  that  the  mysterious  power  which 
often  seems  cruel  is  in  reality  love.  The  voice  of  Jesus, 
which  few,  indeed,  heard,  but  an  echo  of  which  can  still  be 
heard  in  the  words  which  those  who  listened  to  him  have 
recorded,  interprets  to  us  that  other  voice  which  reproves 
and  exhorts  and  comforts  and  inspires,  bidding  us  "come 
up  higher.''    Each  is  the  voice  of  the  One  God. 

To  say  that  God  must  be  identified  with  but  one  "per- 
son" or  voice,  which  we  call  Father,  leads  inevitably  to 
Agnosticism.  To  identify  God  with  Jesus,  as  if  he  had 
never  been  revealed  to  the  men  of  old,  as  the  early  Gnostics 
would  have  done,  as  some  modem  Protestants  are  doing,  is 
to  lose  all  sense  of  the  majesty  of  the  Eternal,  and  tends 
to  the  degradation  of  God  to  a  cheap  good  nature,  forget- 
ful of  what  it  has  cost  to  redeem  our  souls.  To  identify 
God  with  that  voice  which  indeed  speaks  to  us  as  truly  as 
it  spoke  to  Abraham,  is  to  separate  the  church  into  its 
component  parts  and  lose  all  feeling  of  the  "blessed  com- 
pany of  all  faithful  people." 

The  English  Church  passed  by  the  Nicene  Creed  and 
chose  the  "Apostles'  Creed,"  as  stating  its  terms  of  mem- 
bership. This  was  significant.  The  English  people  are  far 
more  like  the  Romans  than  like  the  Greeks,  and  the  prac- 
tical value  of  the  Roman  creed  appealed  to  them  more 
than  the  more  speculative  Greek  confessions  of  faith.  So 
in  the  catechism  the  child  is  asked  what  it  "chiefly  learns 
from  the  articles  of  its  belief,"  i,  e.,  the  Apostles'  Creed. 
And  the  answer  is  that  it  learns  three  things  which  are  the 
essentials  of  the  creed.  First,  to  "believe  in  God  the 
Father,  who  hath  made  me  and  all  the  world.  Secondly, 
in  God  the  Son,  who  hath  redeemed  me  and  all  mankind; 
and,  thirdly,  in  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  sanctifieth  me 
♦See  "Christ's  Thought  of  God,"  J.  M.  Wilson. 


DOCTRINE  189 

and  all  the  people  of  God."    On  this  faith  the  religious 
life  of  the  child  is  built.    So  when  it  says, 

"Now  I  lay  me  down  to  sleep, 
I  pray  the  Lord  my  soul  to  keep," 

it  is  prayer  to  God  thought  of  as  Father.    When  it  says, 

"Jesus,  tender  Shepherd,  hear  me, 
Bless  thy  little  lamb  to-night," 

it  is  in  communion  with  God  as  revealed  in  the  Shepherd 
of  our  souls.    When  it  says, 

"And  when,  dear  Saviour,  I  kneel  down  morning  and  night  in 
prayer, 
Something  there  is  within  my  heart  that  tells  me  thou  art 
there," 

it  is  communing  with  God  as  Holy  Spirit. 

This  is  not  speculative,  it  is  ethical.  The  child  grows  to 
maturity  in  the  consciousness  that  protecting,  redeeming, 
sanctifying  love  is  with  it  from  the  beginning  to  the  end 
of  life.  This  is  the  glory  of  the  "Eternal  Trinity."  To 
know  that  God  is  as  near  us  when  we  pray  as  he  was  near 
to  the  earth  when  the  "morning  stars  sang  together  and 
all  the  sons  of  God  shouted  for  joy,"  to  know  that  in 
Jesus  we  see  the  Father  as  truly  as  did  Philip,  to  be  filled 
with  the  spirit  and  bring  forth  the  fruits  thereof,  is  to 
know  God,  not  as  a  theory  but  as  a  sublime  spiritual  expe- 
rience. God  is  spirit;  seen  in  the  glory  of  the  universe, 
witnessed  to  in  the  life  of  Jesus,  experienced  in  sanctifying 
prayer. 

This  faith  has  come  to  us  through  apostles,  saints,  and 
martyrs.  It  requires  courage  to  hold  it  and  confess  it  to- 
day as  truly,  though  in  a  different  way,  as  when  the  Mo- 
hammedan invasion  threatened  to  overwhelm  the  world. 
We  shall  not  be  persecuted,  only  scorned  by  the  half- 


IQO        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

educated.  We  must  bear  the  strain  which  comes  when 
the  ancient  words  seem  in  conflict  with  our  incomplete 
knowledge.  We  can  learn  what  the  words  mean  if  we  will 
give  the  time  to  their  study.  But  it  requires  no  study  to 
believe  that  the  Eternal  is  revealing  himself  unto  us  as 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  and  that  each  of  these  mani- 
festations is  equally  divine.  I  say  it  does  not  require  great 
knowledge,  but  it  does  require  great  faith,  that  is,  the  in- 
tense activity  of  our  spiritual  nature.  But  I  venture  to 
say  that  it  requires  no  more  to  believe  in  the  divinity  of 
the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  than  to  believe  in  the  divin- 
ity of  the  Father.  If  there  be  in  this  universe  anything 
that  answers  to  our  thought  of  the  divine  power  and  good- 
ness and  love,  it  is  not  easy  to  find  it  in  nature  nor  in  the 
experiences  of  life.  Our  wisest  plans  are  frustrated,  our 
dearest  hopes  are  disappointed,  our  tenderest  feelings  are 
lacerated,  until  it  seems  vain  to  hope  that  there  can  be 
both  power  and  goodness  behind  and  before,  laying  its 
hand  upon  us.  It  is  the  life  of  Jesus  which  keeps  alive 
this  faith.  It  is  the  witness  of  the  spirit  which  leads  us  to 
feel  that  this  faith  is  not  vain.  This,  as  I  understand  it,  is 
the  meaning  of  that  sublime  prayer  which  Cranmer  wrote 
as  the  collect  for  Trinity  Sunday: 

"Almighty  and  Everlasting  God,  who  has  given  unto  us, 
thy  servants,  grace  by  the  confession  of  a  true  faith  to 
acknowledge  the  glory  of  the  Eternal  Trinity,  and  in  the 
power  of  the  Divine  Majesty  to  worship  the  Unity;  we  be- 
seech thee  that  thou  wouldest  keep  us  steadfast  in  that 
faith,  and  evermore  defend  us  from  all  adversities,  who 
livest  and  reignest,  one  God,  world  without  end." 


CHAPTER  XIV 
DOCTRINE 

B,    The  Catholic  Creeds 

In  the  preceding  chapter  it  was  asserted  that  faith  in 
the  triune  personality  of  God  is  the  fundamental  doctrine 
of  the  Christian  church.  Yet  it  may  be  objected:  *'If  the 
doctrine  be  so  liable  to  misapprehension,  as  seems  to  be 
the  case,  would  it  not  be  better  to  abandon  the  ancient 
creeds  and  substitute  for  them  some  simpler  form  of  be- 
lief, which,  by  stating  the  faith  in  modern  language,  would 
avoid  such  misunderstandings?"  No  doubt  there  would 
be  manifest  advantages  in  so  doing,  to  which  attention  will 
be  called  a  little  later.  I  believe  not  a  few  of  the  clergy  of 
the  Episcopal  Church  would  agree  that  it  would  be  better 
if  the  Apostles'  Creed  were  made  the  end  rather  than  the 
beginning  of  Christian  education.  But  whatever  form  a 
simpler  expression  of  the  church's  faith  might  take,  there 
would  be  a  loss  if  there  should  be  any  weakening  of  the 
authoritative  message  of  the  church.  That  authority, 
however,  can  never  be  preserved  by  a  traditional  repetition 
of  the  words  which  once  moved  the  hearts  of  men;  it  must 
be  tested  by  the  response  of  the  deepest  longings  of  the 
human  soul  to-day. 

The  dogmatic  weakness  of  the  churches  arises  not  so 
much  from  the  retention  of  the  ancient  formularies  as  from 
the  uncertainty  of  their  meaning.  The  pulpit  is  turning 
more  and  more  to  economics  and  politics  rather  than  to 
the  truth  of  the  Being  of  God.  These  are  matters  which 
because  they  need  to  be  sanctified  by  the  message  of  the 
church  may  properly  be  referred  to  by  the  pulpit,  but  can 

191 


192        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

never  be  its  supreme  message.  There  are  other  voices 
which  can  preach  industrial  reform;  but  if  the  churches  do 
not  preach  the  doctrine  of  the  truth  of  God,  it  will  be  left 
to  those  who  are  least  fitted  by  character  and  learning  to 
attempt  to  answer  the  question  which  is  the  most  impor- 
tant in  the  world,  and  to  which  an  answer  is  being  de- 
manded to-day  with  as  great  eagerness  as  at  any  time  in 
the  history  of  the  world.  One  has  only  to  glance  at  a 
Sunday  newspaper  to  see  how  many  are  pretending  to 
give  an  answer.  How  gladly  the  world  would  respond  if 
the  church  had  as  definite  a  message  as  many  of  the  The- 
osophists  are  advertising  their  readiness  to  give!  Let  a 
man  of  God  lift  up  his  voice  in  the  pulpit  and  make  it  evi- 
dent that  he  has  something  to  reveal  which  he  has  learned 
by  personal  experience  to  be  true,  and  people  will  flock  to 
hear  him,  so  anxious  are  they  to  learn  about  God. 

Such  a  simplified  creed  as  is  sometimes  asked  for  can- 
not be  the  means  of  unity;  it  must  be  the  result  of  unity. 
Such  a  creed  cannot  be  formulated  till  all  the  churches  are 
given  an  opportunity  to  bear  witness  to  the  truth  as  each 
knows  it.  For  one  church  to  attempt  to  revise  the  Catho- 
lic creeds  would  be  an  offense  to  all  the  others,  and  be  a 
fresh  cause  of  disunion.  But  while  no  individual  church 
would  undertake  to  revise  the  ancient  creeds,  might  it  not 
be  possible  for  some  church — the  Episcopal,  for  example — 
to  substitute  some  simpler  form  than  one  of  the  historic 
creeds  for  use  in  its  public  worship.  This  would  not  be  so 
radical  an  act  as  might  at  first  be  supposed.  The  first 
draft  of  the  American  Prayer-Book  omitted  the  Nicene 
Creed.  The  English  bishops  made  its  retention  a  sine  qua 
non  for  the  consecration  of  Bishop  White,  and  wished  to 
have  the  American  Church  retain  the  Athanasian  Creed 
as  well.  To  the  last,  however,  the  Americans  would  not 
agree,  and  there  was  a  compromise.  Would  there  have 
been  serious  loss  if  the  Nicene  Creed  had  been  omitted  from 
our  services?    I  doubt  it.    Nor  do  I  think  we  should  lose 


DOCTRINE  193 

if  we  were  to  have  a  section  of  our  Prayer-Book  devoted 
to  confessions  of  faith,  to  serve  as  milestones  to  mark  the 
road  which  the  church  has  travelled.  In  such  a  creedal 
section  there  would  be — as  at  present — the  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  showing  the  opinion  of  the  Church  of  England  on 
the  subjects  of  controversy  with  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  in  the  sixteenth  century;  the  Athanasian  Creed,  as 
witnessing  to  the  faith  of  the  early  French  Church  in  its 
conflict  with  the  Saracens;  the  Nicene  Creed,  the  protest 
against  Arianism;  and  the  Apostles'  Creed,  the  Roman 
symbol  in  the  dangerous  times  of  the  Gnostic  heresy  in  the 
second  and  third  centuries. 

If  it  be  thought  that  a  confession  of  faith  is  essential  to 
every  public  service,  might  we  not  find  some  simple  confes- 
sion which  would  serve  the  purpose  better  than  a  more 
ancient  creed?  I  would  suggest  that  such  a  creed  should 
return  to  the  ancient  form,  and  instead  of  the  singular  per- 
sonal pronoun  which  the  Reformation  compilers  of  the 
book  used  as  expressing  the  individuaFs  faith,  begin  with 
a  proclamation  of  the  corporate  faith  of  the  congregation. 
What  should  we  lose  beyond  the  sentiment  of  antiquity 
and  the  charm  of  archaic  forms  by  the  use  of  such  a  creed 
as  this? 

"We  believe  in  one  God:  the  Father,  the  Author  of 
everlasting  life;  the  Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  our  Re- 
deemer; the  Holy  Spirit,  our  Sanctifier. 

"And  we  pray  God  to  keep  us  steadfast  in  this  faith, 
and  that  it  may  be  not  only  confessed  by  our  lips,  but  mani- 
fested in  our  lives  by  a  humble,  holy,  and  obedient  walking 
before  him." 

Such  a  creed  would  assert  our  faith  in  the  Holy  Trinity, 
and  relieve  us  from  the  difficulties  from  which  no  ancient 
formula  can  be  entirely  free.  In  this  way,  by  the  confes- 
sion of  a  true  faith,  we  might  be  given  grace  to  acknowl- 
edge the  glory  of  the  Eternal  Trinity,  that  is,  the  three- 
fold manifestation  or  shining  forth  of  the  one  God  who  is 


194        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

spirit,  and  "in  the  power  of  that  Divine  Majesty  to  wor- 
ship the  Unity."  * 

But  there  is  a  question  connected  with  creeds  which 
must  not  be  overlooked,  because  it  touches  a  deeper  ques- 
tion than  any  so  far  considered,  and  that  is  intellectual 
integrity.  It  may  be  said,  all  that  has  been  asserted  as 
to  the  essence  of  the  creeds  may  be  true,  and  that  the  doc- 
trine of  chief  importance  may  be  the  Trinity  of  God  in 
Unity,  but  it  must  not  be  overlooked  that  this  dogma  is 

*  Since  the  above  was  written  the  whole  question  has  been  fully  dis- 
cussed in  the  "Modern  Churchman's  Conference"  of  1921,  a  report  of 
which  will  be  found  in  The  Modern  Churchman,  September,  192 1.  In 
this  report  will  be  found  several  suggested  creeds;  one  of  these  offered 
by  a  layman,  Douglas  White,  M.A.,  M.D.,  is  as  follows: 

"I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  of  all; 

And  in  Jesus  Christ,  Revealer  of  God,  and  Saviour  of  men: 
And  in  the  Spirit  of  Holiness,  which  is  the  Spirit  of  God  and  of  Jesus: 

By  which  Spirit  man  is  made  divine: 
I  acknowledge  the  communion  of  all  faithful  people. 

In  beauty,  goodness,  and  truth: 
And  I  believe  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  the  glory  of  righteousness, 

The  victory  of  love,  and  the  life  eternal." 

Another,  suggested  by  the  Rev.  R.  J.  Shires,  rector  of  St.  Andrew's, 
La  Tuque,  Province  of  Quebec,  Canada,  is  a  declaration  of  purpose 
rather  than  a  statement  of  faith,  but  is  worthy  of  serious  consideration: 

"That  inasmuch  as  the  real  test  of  our  Christianity  is  that  our  daily 
conduct  shall  harmonize  with  the  will  of  God,  as  declared  by  Jesus 
Christ,  through  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  we  therefore  declare  our 
intention  of  working  together  in  a  Christian  spirit  with  all  who  love 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity: 

"To  improve  and  intensify  our  personal  experience  of  God  by  the 
regular  and  faithful  use  of  every  means  of  grace. 

"  To  live  in  such  a  way  that  men  everywhere  shall  be  able  to  take  note 
of  us  that  we  have  been  with  Jesus. 

*'To  follow  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  will  lead  us  into  all 
truth. 

"To  promote  harmonious  relations  with  all  men. 

"To  seek  that  unity  which  shall  make  us  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus. 

"To  promote  effective  Christianity  in  the  endeavor  to  make  the 
kingdoms  of  this  world  the  kingdom  of  Our  Lord  and  of  his  Christ." 
— The  Modern  Churchman,  November,  192 1. 

When  these  two  suggested  creeds  are  compared,  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  writers  approach  the  problem  from  two  different  standpoints, 


DOCTRINE  195 

embedded  in  a  creed  which  contains  statements  about 
other  matters  which  those  who  recite  the  creed  are  sup- 
posed to  believe.  Do  they  believe  them  ?  The  first  ques- 
tion is  not,  "Are  these  things  true?"  but  "Do  those  who 
say  the  creed  believe  them  to  be  true  ?"  If  they  do,  and 
unquestionably  the  uneducated,  simple-minded  people 
who  constitute  the  vast  majority  in  all  the  churches,  do 
believe,  that  is,  assent  to  them,  then  no  doubt  the  church 
is  justified  in  retaining  the  primitive  form  of  creedal  ex- 
pression. But  can  those  who  do  not  believe  these  state- 
ments, taken  in  their  plain  meaning,  continue  to  assert 
that  they  do  believe  them  when  they  know  in  their  hearts, 

neither  of  which  alone  is  entirely  satisfactory.  For  while  it  is  desirable 
that  there  should  be  a  statement  of  purpose,  it  is  essential  that  there 
should  be  a  clear  statement  of  the  faith  from  which  this  purpose  pro- 
ceeds. We  are  in  danger  to-day  of  substituting  emotion  for  thought, 
and  the  great  value  of  any  creed  consists  in  the  recognition  that  the 
intellect  is  an  essential  element  in  Christian  character.  This  has  been 
well  stated  by  Dr.  Glover: 

"When  we  compare  the  development  of  religion  in  Israel  with  the 
course  it  took  in  the  Graeco-Roman  world,  it  seems  a  fair  conclusion 
from  the  experience  of  Israel  that  more  is  gained  in  the  quest  of  the 
knowledge  of  God  along  the  line  of  thought  and  intellect  than  by  the 
line  of  cult  and  emotion.  Emotion  has  its  place;  it  may  be  doubtfully 
true  that  some  experience  of  facts  is  only  reached  by  means  of  emotion; 
but  emotion  seems  a  normal  concomitant  of  the  deepest  experiences. 
Thus  emotion  has  to  be  cross-examined,  its  evidence  has  to  be  checked, 
and  its  data  corrected.  Every  man  is  born  a  metaphysician,  and  knows 
that  emotion  and  intuition  are  amenable  to  the  court  of  experience, 
and  that  experience  can  only  be  interpreted  by  reason;  though  not 
every  man  will  take  the  trouble  to  carry  the  process  through.  .  .  . 
The  Grseco-Roman  world,  depressed  by  long  wars  and  ruined  by  the 
loss  of  freedom,  was  in  a  hurry  for  spiritual  peace;  it  swung  off  from  the 
philosophic  school  to  the  shrine,  and  before  long  it  compelled  the  philos- 
ophers to  come  and  make  their  peace  with  the  gods  of  taboo  and  magic." 
— "Jesus  in  the  Experience  of  Men,"  T.  R.  Glover,  Student  Christian 
Movement,  1921,  pp.  103-104. 

Are  not  the  churches  to-day  manifesting  the  same  spirit  of  "hurry" 
which  is  here  said  to  have  been  characteristic  of  the  churches  of  the 
Graeco-Roman  world?  If  so,  it  might  be  better  to  retain  the  ancient 
formularies  for  the  present,  even  though  we  recognize  the  difficulties  in 
so  doing,  rather  than  to  attempt  a  hasty  solution  which  might  lead  to 
even  greater  disadvantages. 


196        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

and  some  of  those  who  worship  with  them  know,  that  they 
no  more  believe  them  than  they  believe  the  sun  moves 
around  the  earth?  No  value  of  historic  continuity  or 
aesthetic  feeling  will  justify  any  man  in  continuing  the 
use  of  words  in  the  worship  of  God  who  cannot  declare 
that  he  is  worshipping  God  in  truth.  Men  and  women, 
and  above  all  the  clergy,  are  obliged  to  use  a  subtlety  which 
would  be  condemned  in  the  practical  affairs  of  life,  when 
they  say  that  they  believe  Jesus  was  bom  in  the  way  the 
creed  asserts  or  that  he  rose  from  the  dead  "taking  again 
his  body,  with  flesh  and  bones,"  as  the  Fourth  Article  of 
Rehgion  declares,  when,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  believe 
something  very  different. 

This  is  a  very  serious  charge  and  should  not  be  ignored. 
It  is  not  always  brought  as  a  "railing  accusation";  it  is 
rather  a  serious  difficulty  which  should  be  dealt  with  con- 
scientiously and  frankly. 

It  arises,  I  am  convinced,  from  a  misunderstanding  of 
the  purpose  of  the  creeds.  That  purpose  is  to  present  to 
the  faithful  a  form  of  words  in  which  is  embodied  the  faith 
of  the  church,  and  those  who  recite  the  creed  are  witnessing 
to  their  unity  in  the  faith  which  has  been  the  banner  of 
the  church  from  generation  to  generation.  Had  it  never 
been  formulated  and  were  the  church  to  undertake  its 
formulation  to-day,  it  would  probably  be  expressed  in  the 
scientific  and  philosophic  and  perhaps  economic  language 
of  the  best  thought  of  the  day.  In  other  words,  it  would 
be  expressed  in  the  language  which  reflects  the  prevailing 
opinions  of  the  day  in  which  we  are  living.  Now,  if  one 
could  imagine  one  of  the  faithful  who  lived  in  the  fourth 
century  returning  to  earth,  he  would  find  a  creed  formu- 
lated to-day  so  different  from  the  opinions  with  which  he 
had  been  familiar  that  it  would  be  impossible  for  him  to 
repeat  it  intelligently  or,  as  we  say,  ^^ex  animoJ'  But  sup- 
pose he  finally  made  himself  familiar  with  the  prevailing 
opinions  of  this  age,  and  it  was  explained  to  him  that  the 


DOCTRINE  197 

purpose  of  the  creed  was  to  express  the  faith  of  old  in  the 
language  of  modem  times,  can  we  not  believe  that  he  would 
find  it  possible  to  recite  the  modern  creed  though  the  opin- 
ions were  unfamiliar  and  even  unbelievable,  if  by  so  doing 
he  could  bear  witness  that  the  faith  in  which  he  had  lived 
in  the  days  of  old  was  identical  with  the  faith  which  is 
now  stated  in  terms  which  he  never  would  have  employed 
in  the  days  of  his  flesh? 

Something  like  this,  it  seems  to  me,  is  what  we  are  called 
upon  to  do  when  we  recite  the  creed.  It  is  the  ancient 
expression  of  sl  faith  which  is  the  same  "yesterday,  to-day, 
and  forever."  We  know  what  the  men  of  old  were  trying 
to  express;  they  were  so  convinced  that  Jesus  was  a  super- 
human person  that  they  could  not  think — as  probably 
Paul  and  John  did  * — that  he  had  come  into  this  world 
as  the  other  children  of  God  had  come,  and  therefore  they 
said  that  "he  was  bom  of  a  Virgin."  They  were  so  con- 
vinced that  no  phantom  had  appeared  and  influenced  their 
lives  that  they  said  that  "Jesus  after  his  death  declared 
that  he  had  flesh  and  bones."  These  were  the  necessary 
forms  which  the  expression  of  their  faith  took.  But  sup- 
pose a  man  who  lives  in  this  day  is  convinced  that  in  these 
matters  they  were  mistaken,  is  he  debarred  from  using 
the  ancient  words  because  the  opinions  of  the  former  day 
no  longer  satisfy  him  if  he  be  firmly  persuaded  that  his 
faith  in  God  and  Jesus  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  same  as 
they  held.^  Can  such  a  one  be  accused  of  dishonesty  if 
he  makes  no  pretense  of  accepting  the  current  opinion 
when  he  uses  the  ancient  words  to  express  the  living  faith  ? 

"Perhaps  not,"  it  may  be  said.  "But  inasmuch  as  so 
much  explanation  is  required  and  inasmuch  as  the  plain 
man  identifies  the  spiritual  conviction  with  the  intellectual 
opinion,  why  should  we  not  abandon  a  form  which  leads 
to  such  misunderstanding?"  There  is  much  to  be  said 
in  favor  of  so  doing,  but  it  might  be  found  that  the  loss  is 
*  Per  contra  see  "Belief  in  God,"  by  Bishop  Gore,  p.  275. 


198        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

greater  than  the  gain.  In  the  first  place,  it  would  require 
the  church  to  identify  the  faith  with  the  current  opinion 
of  this  age.  But  who  can  assure  us  that  this  opinion  will 
not  change  in  the  next  hundred  years  ?  The  Darwinian 
theory  of  evolution  was  almost  a  matter  of  faith  with  scien- 
tific men  twenty-five  years  ago,  but  how  greatly  has  it 
been  modified  by  later  discoveries !  God  is  the  unchang- 
ing element  in  life,  and  the  classic  expression  of  the  faith 
in  God  may  be  taken  as  a  symbol  and  intelligently  used 
rather  than  attempt  to  vary  the  expression  with  every 
change  in  changing  opinion. 

We  not  unnaturally  think  that  the  difficulty  is  a  modern 
one.  It  is,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  very  old.  Those  who  in 
our  own  church  are  most  insistent  upon  the  literal  inter- 
pretation of  the  creeds  in  the  two  articles  which  speak  of 
the  Incarnation  and  the  Resurrection  of  our  Lord,  have 
forgotten  that  they  have  changed  the  interpretation  of 
other  articles  without  any  consciousness  of  dishonesty. 
Who  believes  that  the  world  was  made  in  six  days  as  the 
Book  of  Genesis  declares,  which  was  unquestionably  the 
opinion  of  the  framers  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  ?  No  edu- 
cated man  to-day;  but  that  was  what  practically  every 
one  believed  when  the  creed  was  set  forth.  Who  thinks 
of  the  dead  arising  from  their  graves,  as  our  fathers 
thought  ?  Who  that  has  given  any  serious  thought  to  the 
matter  can  think  that  Raphael's  picture  of  the  ''Ascen- 
sion" is  the  representation  of  a  great  cosmic  fact?  Who 
now  thinks  that  this  earth  is  to  come  to  an  end  in  the  way 
the  Epistle  of  Peter  predicts,  and  that  the  Lord  is  to  de- 
scend, as  Paul  once  thought,  to  inaugurate  the  reign  of 
the  saints?  All  these  are  exploded  opinions.  Yet  the 
faith  in  the  exaltation  of  the  man  who  once  was  crowned 
with  thorns  to  be  crowned  with  glory  now;  the  standing 
up  of  the  living  personality  in  a  new  life  after  death,  and 
the  gradual  spreading  of  the  light  of  the  Sun  of  Righteous- 
ness till  all  ''the  earth  is  filled  with  the  knowledge  of  the 


DOCTRINE  199 

Lord  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea";  the  inheritance  of  the 
earth,  not  by  the  violent,  the  men  who  delight  in  war,  but 
by  the  meek,  the  peacemakers — this  is  the  faith  of  Chris- 
tian men  to-day  as  truly  as  when  they  expressed  it  in  the 
childlike  language  of  a  prescientific  age.  The  creation 
of  the  heavens  and  the  earth  is  no  less  mysterious  nor  sub- 
lime than  the  compiler  of  Genesis  thought;  it  is  infinitely 
more  mysterious  and  glorious  when  conceived  as  the  effect 
of  that  Being 

"Whose  dwelling  is  the  light  of  setting  suns, 
And  the  round  ocean,  and  the  living  air, 
And  the  blue  sky,  and  in  the  mind  of  man: 
A  motion  and  a  spirit,  that  impels 
All  thinking  things,  all  objects  of  all  thought, 
And  rolls  through  all  things." 

Opinions  vary  from  age  to  age,  but  the  faith  remains 
the  same,  and  it  is  the  living  faith,  and  not  the  fleeting 
opinion,  to  which  we  declare  our  adherence  when  we  recite 
the  childlike  words  of  the  church. 

We  say  "childlike"  not  in  the  spirit  of  pitying  superior- 
ity; we  recognize  that  in  the  days  to  come,  our  thoughts 
and  words  will  seem  childish  to  those  whom  the  spirit  of 
truth  has  led  more  deeply  into  the  mystery  of  Hfe  than  we 
have  yet  penetrated;  we  use  the  word  in  deep  affection 
for  those  who  knew  so  little  and  yet  loved  so  much,  and 
because  we  would  keep  in  that  innocent  and  lovely  com- 
pany all  the  days  of  our  hfe.  But  the  only  way  in  which 
this  can  be  done  is  by  the  use  of  the  child^s  language.  The 
child  may  be  taught  to  speak  as  men  speak,  but  it  will  be 
a  forced  word.  The  elders  in  the  family  must  speak  the 
language  of  the  children  until  such  time  as  the  children 
are  able  to  speak  as  men.  In  this  way  only,  in  the  family 
life,  are  the  hearts  of  the  children  turned  to  the  fathers, 
and  the  hearts  of  the  fathers  to  the  children.  ''  Mother, 
where  did  the  baby  come  from?"  says  the  Uttle  girl  to 


200        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHrjRCHES 

her  mother,  and  the  mother  does  not  try  to  instruct  her 
in  the  science  of  obstetrics,  but  answers  in  the  way  the 
child's  heart  will  respond  to  a  great  truth,  and  says:  "It 
came  from  God,  my  darling,  and  was  brought  by  the  holy 
angels."  Has  the  mother  spoken  the  truth?  The  boy 
says:  "Father,  at  what  time  did  the  sun  rise  to-day?" 
Does  the  father  explain  that  the  sun  never  rises,  but  that 
the  earth,  turning  on  its  axis,  produces  an  optical  illusion? 
If  so,  he  may  produce  a  little  Sandf  ord  or  Merton  or  a  little 
Rollo,  but  the  father  will  never  by  that  method  gain  the 
confidence  of  the  child.  If  he  answers  that  the  sun  rose 
at  such  or  such  an  hour,  he  tells  the  truth,  for  the  truth  is 
that  at  that  hour  the  light  of  the  sun  began  to  bathe  the 
earth  and  call  men  to  their  duties  and  their  pleasures,  and 
later  the  child  can  learn  the  scientific  explanation,  but 
never  quite  loses  the  ancient  sense  of  the  coming  of  the 
light  in  the  way  the  vast  majority  of  the  human  race 
had  opined  that  it  comes,  and  which  is  so  embedded  in 
the  child's  consciousness  that  it  must  not  be  rudely  eradi- 
cated* 

By  such  a  use  of  the  creeds  we  keep  alive  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  spiritual  unity  of  the  church.    And  this  is  not 

*  "Every  revolution  in  the  world- view  has  profoundly  affected  man- 
kind in  those  aspects  of  life  which  depend  upon  reason.  ...  So  far  as 
most  of  us  are  concerned  the  principle  of  relativity  may  seem  a  matter 
of  small  importance,  dealing  with  infinitesimals  which  in  the  ordinary 
business  of  life  are  entirely  inappreciable.  It  disturbs  our  general 
scientific  methods  no  more  than  the  Copernican  theory  disturbed  the 
practical  adjustments  of  the  human  mind.  For  mankind  the  sun  con- 
tinues to  rise  and  set.  We  reckon  the  times  and  the  seasons,  as  men 
have  always  done,  and  will  do,  irrespective  of  any  change  which  has 
taken  place,  or  may  take  place,  in  astronomical  theory.  Newton's 
law  of  the  inverse  square  will  not  cease  to  be  a  practical  rule  for  engi- 
neers and  mechanicians  for  all  economic  projects,  nor  will  it  cease  to 
commend  itself  by  its  simplicity,  if  Einstein's  formula  comes  to  be 
recognized  as  theoretically  perfect.  In  religion,  however,  and  in  philos- 
ophy— philosophy  as  it  concerns  mankind  generally,  and  not  as  tech- 
nical metaphysics  or  theory  of  knowledge — its  effect  will  be  profound 
and  far-reaching." — "The  General  Principle  of  Relativity,"  H.  Wildon 
Carr  (Macmillan  &  Co.),  p.  153. 


DOCTRINE  20I 

a  mere  sentiment.  It  has  a  practical  value.  There  are 
multitudes  of  people  who  are  still  intellectually  in  the  first 
or  the  fourteenth  century.  The  number  whose  thought 
is  purely  in  the  twentieth  is  small.  If,  then,  the  church 
is  to  have  any  common  expression  of  faith,  it  must  be  in 
the  language  and  embodied  in  the  opinions  of  those  who 
think  as  did  those  who  lived  in  an  earlier  age,  and  find  the 
traditional  language  congenial. 

I  hope  the  foregoing  may  not  seem  trivial.  It  is  only 
an  illustration  drawn  from  the  life  of  the  family  of  a  truth 
which  persists  all  through  life  and  is  the  essential  in  all 
social  intercourse.  It  is  illustrated  in  legal  practice,  based 
on  the  common  law,  where  the  ancient  forms  are  retained 
and  applied  to  conditions  which  could  not  have  been  fore- 
seen. It  is  the  cement  of  our  political  life.  Lodge,  in  his 
discriminating  life  of  Webster,  reminds  us  that  Hayne 
represented  the  original  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  but 
that  Webster  interpreted  it  not  as  the  fathers  had  con- 
ceived but  as  it  had  become  under  the  influence  of  an  ex- 
panding Nationalism.*  Its  application  is  essential  to  the 
retention  of  the  early  ideals  of  the  republic.  The  Declara- 
tion of  Independence  is  our  national  creed.  But  can  we 
interpret  it  as  Jefferson  did  ?  Its  significance  has  expanded. 
The  black  man  as  well  as  the  white  is  now  dwelling  under 
the  aegis  of  freedom. f  What  is  more,  it  is  seen  to  be  not  the 
declaration  of  a  fact  but  rather  the  expression  of  a  sublime 
hope.  To  say  that  all  men  are  "born  free  and  equal,"  as 
the  Declaration  is  frequently  misquoted,!  is  not  a  fact.  To 
say,  as  the  Declaration  does,  that  all  men  were  "created 
free  and  equaP'  is  to  announce  the  divine  purpose  which 
has  never  been  realized,  but  toward  which  we  press  in- 
spired by  a  sublime  hope.  In  the  same  way  we  say  we  be- 
lieve in  the  catholic  church,  which  has  never  been  his- 

*  See  "  Daniel  Webster,  American  Statesmen,"  Houghton  Mifflin  Co. 

t  Alas,  only  theoretically. 

t  Almost  always  in  English  books,  from  Thackeray  to  Dean  Inge. 


202        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

torically  realized,  but  is  the  goal  of  Christian  endeavor. 
The  employment  of  ancient  words  in  a  new  and  larger 
sense  is  not  a  new  attempt  to  escape  from  the  undesirable; 
it  is  to  continue  in  the  path  marked  out  by  Paul,  following 
in  the  footsteps  of  Jesus.  How  can  Paul  say  that  the 
church  is  the  Israel  of  God?  It  is  not  true,  if  we  insist 
that  words  must  always  mean  the  same  thing.  It  is  true 
if  words  are  enriched  by  experience.  When  Jesus  was 
asked,  "How  say  the  scribes  that  Elias  must  first  come?" 
he  answered  in  the  words  of  the  creed  of  the  synagogue 
in  which  he  had  been  brought  up:  "Elias  truly  cometh 
and  restoreth  all  things.  But  I  say  unto  you  that  Elias 
has  already  come.  Then  understood  they  that  he  spake 
unto  them  of  John  the  Baptist." 

Israel  was  the  company  with  whom  God  was  in 
covenant.  The  Jews,  according  to  Paul,  had  broken  the 
covenant,  and  the  church,  having  succeeded  to  their  privi- 
lege, was  now  the  true  Israel.  Elias,  the  scribes  believed, 
would  come  in  the  person  of  the  old  Tishbite,  but  Jesus 
said  he  had  come  in  the  person  of  the  heroic  reformer  who 
bore  witness  in  the  face  of  a  modern  Ahab  and  Jezebel  to 
the  kingdom  of  God.  If  the  use  of  the  creed  is  condemned 
on  the  ground  that  it  is  immoral  to  use  words  except  in 
their  original  sense,  and  not  as  symbols  of  a  truth  which 
has  been  emancipated  from  outgrown  opinions,  then  both 
Paul  and  Jesus  must  be  condemned  too.  Indeed,  we  may 
say  that  the  whole  Bible  is  lacking  in  intellectual  veracity. 
From  Isaiah  to  Revelation  there  are  innumerable  illustra- 
tions of  spiritual  development  which  have  changed  the 
meaning  of  ancient  conceptions.  Only  in  this  way  has  it 
been  possible  to  preserve  the  continuity  of  religious  de- 
velopment, and  prevent  each  new  prophet  from  anticipat- 
ing the  heresy  of  Marcion  and  the  early  Gnostics,  which 
insisted  that  each  new  truth  compelled  an  abandonment 
of  past  religious  experience.  But  then  who  can  escape? 
Not  many  of  those  who  object,  for  they  are  using  the  word 


DOCTRINE  203 

"God"  as  if  it  had  the  same  significance  to-day  as  in  the 
days  of  old.  Yet  who  can  say  that  that  significance  is 
true,  or  that  any  two  men  connote  the  same  idea  by  the 
familiar  word?  To  the  child  God  is  visualized  as  a  great 
man;  to  the  philosopher  he  is  the  spirit  without  form  in 
whom  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being.  No  social 
religious  life  is  possible  unless  the  learned  and  the  wise 
are  willing  to  use  the  words  of  the  simple  and  the  child- 
like, each  having  his  own  opinion  and  both  united  in  a 
sublime  faith  which  no  words  can  adequately  express. 

There  is  another  objection  to  this  view  of  the  creeds 
which,  though  it  shows,  as  I  think,  a  confusion  of  thought, 
has  a  real  meaning  which  should  not  be  ignored.  "The 
creed,"  it  is  often  said,  "is  a  statement  of  facts,  and  there- 
fore should  not  be  dissolved  into  a  mere  theory  of  salva- 
tion." But  this  will  hardly  bear  examination.  A  "fact" 
is  something  that  is  known,  not  something  which  is  be- 
lieved. If  the  creed  is  indeed  a  statement  of  facts,  it  is 
not  the  expression  of  faith  but  of  knowledge.  Well,  look 
at  the  first  article  of  the  creed:  "I  believe  in  God  the 
Father  Almighty,  maker  of  heaven  and  earth."  Is  that 
the  statement  of  a  fact?  Can  it  be  proved?  Is  it  sus- 
ceptible of  apprehension  by  the  senses,  or  is  it  something 
which  some  man  beheld  and  has  handed  down  to  us  as 
other  facts  of  history  have  been  handed  down?  The  uni- 
verse is  a  fact.  But  the  "creation"  of  it  is  believed  by  all 
who  believe  in  God.  Is  the  "Resurrection  of  the  body"  a 
fact,  or  the  "life  everlasting,"  or  "the  coming  of  Christ 
to  Judgment"?  This  objection  will  not  bear  examination. 
What  those  who  use  such  language  mean  to  say  is  that 
certain  parts  of  the  creed  are  statements  of  facts.  This  is 
true.  But  if  we  ask  what  they  are,  it  will  be  found  that 
they  are  statements  concerning  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus, 
and  it  is  most  important  that  we  should  not  suppose  him 
to  be  a  myth  but  a  veritable  historical  person.  Ours  is, 
indeed,  an  historic  religion.    We  may  go  further  and  say 


204        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

that  it  was  this  primarily  which  the  fonnulators  of  the 
creed  had  in  mind  to  emphasize  when  they  put  forth  the 
creed.  The  danger  was  that  the  life  oi  Jesus  should  be 
thought  of  as  one  of  the  many  "mysteries"  which  were 
appealing  to  the  popular  religious  fancy  in  the  second  cen- 
tury. Against  this  the  creed  protested.  One  form  of 
Gnosticism  would  have  reduced  Jesus  to  a  phantom.  It 
was  the  reality  of  his  manhood  that  the  creed  emphasized. 
His  divinity  at  that  time  needed  no  emphasis.  It  was  be- 
lieved, but  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  the  Incarnation  a 
myth.  If,  then,  we  ask  what  are  the  ** facts'^  which  the 
creed  lays  emphasis  upon,  they  are  the  birth  of  Jesus,  his 
sufferings  and  death  under  the  rule  of  Rome,  the  reality 
of  his  death  and  burial,  and  his  resurrection  from  the  dead. 
Now  side  by  side  with  these  facts  went  a  belief  in  the  sig- 
nificance of  this  life  which  made  it  different  from  every 
other  life.  By  his  birth  there  had  come  into  the  world 
the  perfect  man,  the  express  image  of  the  Father's  person. 
The  Jew  needed  no  miracle  to  convince  him  of  this  truth. 
He  had  been  brought  up  to  expect  the  "seed  of  Abraham'^ 
to  bless  the  world.  But  the  Greek  had  always  insisted 
that  such  a  one  must  be  the  offspring  of  the  gods.  To  them 
the  birth  of  the  Saviour  in  the  way  it  is  described  in  two  of 
the  Gospels  was  a  necessity.  But  the  faith  of  those  who 
believed  the  miracle  and  those  who  were  indifferent  to  it 
was  one.*  Both  believed  that  through  him  we  have  re- 
mission of  sins.  He  who  believes  that  believes  what  the 
creed  embodies  in  a  form  which  may  no  longer  appeal  to 

*  "Certainly  nothing  concerning  the  birth  of  Jesus  was  part  of  that 
assurance  on  the  basis  of  which  faith  in  Jesus  was  claimed.  I  may  add 
that  it  ought  not  to  this  day  to  form  part  of  the  basis  of  the  claim.  .  .  . 

"I  think  that  those  who  believe  that  the  historical  citadel  can  be 
maintained  should  insist  that  the  question  of  the  birth  is  secondary 
and  not  primary,  viz.:  that  the  question  of  faith  in  Jesus  must  rest 
still,  where  it  was  made  to  rest  from  the  beginning,  on  the  life,  teaching, 
death,  and  resurrection  of  Jesus.  On  these,  quite  apart  from  any 
questions  concerning  his  birth,  the  faith  stood  and  still  could  stand." — 
"Belief  in  God,"  by  Bishop  Gore,  pp.  274,  279-280. 


DOCTRINE  205 

him,  and  to  which  he  attaches  little  importance.  The 
framers  of  the  creed  believed  that  it  was  by  Jesus*  death 
upon  the  cross  that  the  sense  of  forgiveness  had  been 
brought  to  the  world,  and  were  therefore  content  to  leave 
it  with  the  simple  statement  of  the  *'fact."  They  believed 
that  they  were  as  truly  in  communion  with  the  Lord  who 
had  been  dead  and  was  alive  again  as  the  disciples  of  Jesus 
were.  That  this  could  be  without  his  "resurrection/'  that 
is,  his  rehabilitation  in  the  flesh,  seemed  to  them  impos- 
sible. And  because  they  believed  this  of  Jesus  they  be- 
lieved it  of  themselves.  The  two  go  together.  It  is  to  be 
remembered  that  Greek  philosophy  had  thrown  but  dim 
light  on  the  problem  of  personality,  and  the  early  Chris- 
tians were  unable  to  conceive  of  the  perpetuation  of  full 
personality  dissociated  from  the  body.  Paul  saw  that  and 
said  we  shall  be  raised  from  the  dead  as  Jesus  was.  He 
attempted  to  meet  this  difficulty  by  declaring  that  a  "  spir- 
itual'' body  shall  be  the  manifestation  of  the  risen  per- 
sonality. The  faith  the  church  held  we  hold  too.  The 
form  in  which  the  faith  was  expressed  not  a  few  believe 
to  be  the  temporary  clothing  of  great  truths. 

The  whole  question  has  been  well  stated  by  a  recent 
writer  who  speaks  with  authority  because  he  is  at  once  a 
scientific  teacher  and  a  devout  Christian.  "The  question 
is  not  whether  it  is  honest  to  reinterpret  old  phrases  in 
new  senses;  that  does  not  describe  what  is  being  done.  It 
is.  May  we  frankly  abandon  some  old  phrases  except  as 
historical;  using  them  as  what  they  truly  are,  mile-stones 
on  the  path  of  knowledge  of  God;  early  intellectual  forms 
in  which  faith  expressed  itself,  still  of  devotional  value  to 
us  all;  but  forms  not  intellectually  binding  on  all  men  for- 
ever, mile-stones  we  have  left  behind?"* 

Those  who,  in  the  interests  of  the  "faith  once  for  all  de- 

♦  "Christ's  Thought  of  God,"  James  W.  Wilson,  D.D.  (Macmillan  & 
Co.),  p.  87.  The  whole  chapter  should  be  read  by  those  who  wish  to 
see  this  question  considered  in  a  reverent  and  clear  spirit. 


2o6        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

livered  to  the  saints,"  insist  upon  the  literal  interpretation 
of  the  creed  may  find  that  they  have  served  neither  the 
cause  of  truth  nor  of  the  church.  I  could  name  not  a  few 
devout  men  and  women  who  are,  I  believe,  in  full  accord 
with  the  faith  yet  who,  because  of  the  wide-spread  opinion 
that  the  creed  must  be  taken  in  a  sense  which  is  repugnant 
to  their  reason,  refuse  to  say  it  at  all,  and,  because  they 
believe  that  the  "church  teaches''  that  the  acceptance  of 
the  creed  ^'ex  animo''  is  necessary  to  the  reception  of  the 
Sacrament,  have  for  years  failed  to  enjoy  the  full  com- 
munion of  the  church  of  which  they  are  in  truth  devoted 
members. 

The  defenders  of  the  faith  might  do  well  to  consider  seri- 
ously such  words  as  these:  "Creeds  cannot  be  .  .  .  abso- 
lutely regulative  of  the  church's  faith.  All  that  they  can 
do,  as  witnesses  to  the  continuity  of  truth,  is  to  demand 
that  the  later  doctrinal  developments  be  not  altogether  out 
of  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  the  earlier.  When  anything 
beyond  this  is  claimed  for  them,  as  if  they  had  the  power 
of  stereotyping  the  form  of  belief,  they  are  exalted  to  a 
position  which  endangers  the  very  truth  they  are  sup- 
posed to  defend.  It  is  vain,  then,  to  hope  that  the  time 
will  come  when  the  church  will  only  believe  what  is  for- 
mally tabulated  in  her  confessions.  Such  a  time  can  only 
come  when  what  is  best  in  our  theology  is  stifled  by  creeds, 
and  when  all  connection  between  theology  and  general 
scientific  culture  has  ceased."  * 

"Even  when  belief  has  not  outgrown  the  formulas  by 
which  it  has  been  traditionally  expressed,  we  must  beware 
of  treating  this  fiixity  of  form  as  indicating  complete  iden- 
tity of  substance.  Men  do  not  necessarily  believe  exactly 
the  same  thing  because  they  express  their  convictions  in 
exactly  the  same  phrases.    And  most  fortunate  it  is  in  the 

*  "Schleiermacher:  Werke,"  vol.  V,  pp.  440-441.  Quoted  in  "Schleier- 
macher,"  Robert  Munroe.  Paisley,  Alexander  Gardiner,  1903,  pp. 
104-105. 


DOCTRINE  207 

interest  of  individual  liberty,  social  co-operation,  and  in- 
stitutional continuity  that  this  latitude  should  be  secured 
to  us,  not  by  the  policy  of  philosophers,  statesmen,  or  di- 
vines, but  by  the  inevitable  limitation  of  language."  * 

It  may  be  well  now  to  sum  up  in  a  word  the  conclusions 
reached  in  these  two  chapters  on  "Doctrine."  The  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  all  the  churches  is  the  triune  personality 
of  God.  In  the  creeds  there  is  the  early  expression  of  the 
church's  faith  in  the  language  with  which  their  compilers 
were  familiar  and  in  the  atmosphere  in  which  they  lived 
and  breathed.  These  creeds  cannot  be  used  intelligently 
in  the  twentieth  century  except  by  the  application  of  the 
same  method  which  characterizes  the  writers  of  the  Bible, 
and,  in  modem  days,  the  practice  of  the  law,  and  in  the 
familiar  family  life.  So  used  they  may  prove  helpful  and 
prepare  the  way  for  a  more  modem  expression  of  the  un- 
changing faith  which  will  commend  itself  to  the  intelli- 
gence and  the  moral  purpose  of  the  church  of  the  future. 

*  "Theism  and  Humanism,"  Gifford  Lectures,  1914,  by  Arthur 
James  Balfour. 


CHAPTER  XV 

SACRAMENTARIANISM 

However  reasonable  much  of  the  foregoing  may  seem 
to  the  average  Christian,  it  will  be  strongly  repudiated  by 
the  Anglo-Catholic,  and  that  for  two  reasons:  In  the  first 
place  it  contradicts  his  theory  of  revelation,  and  in  the 
second  seems  to  ignore  the  value  of  the  sacramental  life. 
Such  an  one,  though  far  from  wishing  to  deny  that  there 
are  many  devout  men  and  women  to  be  found  in  all  the 
churches,  or  that  these  are,  in  a  sense,  disciples  of  Jesus, 
nevertheless  insists  that  all  that  can  be  concluded  from 
such  a  fact  is  that  there  are  many  individuals  who  are  only 
potential  members  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  because  so  far 
they  have  had  no  proper  understanding  of  the  church  it- 
self. Such  seem  to  him  like  the  young  ruler  in  the  Gospel, 
who  "was  not  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God,"  yet  certainly 
not  in  it.  Or  he  thinks  of  them  as  did  Aquila  and  Priscilla 
of  Apollos;  he  cannot  deny  that  they  are  gifted,  but  he 
feels  that  he  represents  those  v^ho  are  to  "teach  the  way 
of  God  more  perfectly.'*  Therefore  he  explains  the  divi- 
sion of  the  churches  by  saying  that  "it  is  caused  by  the 
ignorance  of  those  who  do  not  understand  that  the  Church 
of  the  Living  God  is  supernatural  and  demands  the  vital 
imity  which  would  enable  it  to  do  the  work  for  which  it 
was  ordained.  This  Protestantism  has  never  imderstood, 
and  so  has  failed  to  bear  witness  to  the  truth.  It  is  impos- 
sible that  any  convincing  witness  can  be  borne  with  author- 
ity while  the  church  is  divided  into  a  great  number  of 
groups,  each  one  of  which  pretends  to  speak  with  author- 
ity. Their  witnesses  do  not  agree  together.  If  the  church 
is  to  speak  with  authority,  it  must  speak  as  one." 

208 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  209 

How  these  objectors  reconcile  such  opinions  with  their 
separation  from  the  Church  of  Rome  we  need  not  now  con- 
sider. But  it  is  important  to  call  attention  to  one  thing 
that  seems  to  have  been  overlooked,  which  is  that  if  the 
message  of  the  church  be  not  true,  it  will  gain  no  authority 
by  being  proclaimed  by  one  body.  The  real  question  is: 
Is  the  message  of  the  church  true  ?  Or  to  put  it  in  another 
way:  Are  the  metaphysical  theories  and  the  prescientific 
statements  which  the  church  has  identified  with  the  faith 
the  real  message  of  the  church  ?  The  Anglo-Catholic  seems 
to  affirm  that  they  are,  because  he  is  obsessed  by  a  theory 
which  has  not  been  deduced  from  the  facts.  This  theory 
rests  upon  an  assumption  that  truth  was  "given"  in  its 
entirety  centuries  ago,  and  is  incapable  of  increase,  and 
that  having  been  once  formulated  it  can  never  be  restated. 
But  this  is  contrary  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  according  to 
John.  The  promise  of  Jesus  was  that  the  spirit  would 
lead  into  truth,  more  and  more.  Some  truth,  but  not  the 
whole  truth,  was  set  forth  by  Jesus,  and  of  that  only  a 
part  was  apprehended  by  the  first  disciples:  "I  have  yet 
many  things  to  tell  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them  now,  but 
when  the  spirit  of  truth  has  come  he  will  lead  you  into  all 
truth."  That  prophecy,  we  believe,  has  been  justified  by 
the  history  of  the  church  and  is  far  from  being  exhausted. 
The  church  is  not  worshipping  an  "unknown  God."  It 
has  learned,  by  the  revelation  of  Jesus,  something — and 
that  the  essential — about  God.  It  does  not  accept  that 
revelation  on  the  external  authority  of  Jesus  alone — it  be- 
gins with  that,  but  goes  on  to  verify  it  by  experience. 

The  primary  work  of  the  church,  then,  is  to  bear  witness 
to  "the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,"  and  to  test  new  truth  by 
the  principles  which  he  revealed.  But  to  say  that  the 
church  has  received  all  that  it  is  ever  to  receive,  while  in 
every  other  department  of  life  progress  is  being  made  in 
the  knowledge  of  truth,  is  to  admit  that  the  church  is  dead. 
If  the  great  progress  which  has  been  made  in  the  knowl- 


2IO        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

edge  of  this  universe,  of  the  human  race  and  the  psychol- 
ogy of  the  individual  be  not  paralleled  by  an  equal  ad- 
vance in  the  knowledge  of  God,  it  leads  to  one  of  two  con- 
clusions, either  of  which  would  be  fatal  to  the  life  of  the 
church.  The  first  is  that  all  this  advance  in  knowledge 
has  come  apart  from  the  influence  of  the  spirit  of  God — 
that  is,  that  all  our  education  has  been  atheistic;  or  else 
that  there  is  one  department  of  life — and  that  the  most 
important — ^where  the  spirit  no  longer  leads,  except  back- 
ward. The  wide-spread  scepticism  on  the  part  of  many 
educated  men  and  women  of  the  teaching  of  the  church  is 
due,  I  believe,  rather  to  this  error  than  to  any  specific 
attack  upon  the  faith.  The  church  needs  to  learn  what 
the  "world"  has  already  learned,  that  truth  is  a  call  to  a 
great  adventure.  It  cannot  be  delivered  once  for  all.  The 
church,  like  her  Master,  must  slowly  "increase  in  wisdom." 
This  does  not  imply  that  the  statements  of  the  past  to 
which  the  church  has  given  a  sanctity  which  in  some  quar- 
ters seems  greater  than  that  ascribed  to  the  words  of  Jesus 
himself  are  without  value;  it  only  means  that  they  should 
not  be  supposed  to  be  the  final  expression  of  truth. 

The  Catholic  creeds  are  an  important  part  of  the  church's 
varied  and  rich  inheritance,  and  should  be  held  in  reverent 
esteem  as  one  of  the  many  attempts  of  the  religious  phil- 
osophic mind  to  express  the  truth  in  a  form  which  would 
be  intelligible  to  men  who  were  seeking  after  God.  As  has 
been  well  said,  they  are  "mile-stones"  in  the  church's 
journey.  But  they  fail  of  their  purpose  when  they  are 
made  termini.  We  ought  to  say  of  them,  as  we  say  of  some 
of  the  great  scientific  formulas  which  have  been  the  start- 
ing-point for  new  advance  in  knowledge,  that  they  are 
reverent  hypotheses,  which  may  in  time  be  superseded 
by  a  larger  statement  of  truth.  But  to  identify  them  with 
the  "faith,"  which  is  the  spiritual  activity  of  the  soul  of 
man  in  communion  with  God,  the  only  faith  which  can 
remove  mountains,  is  not  to  exalt  truth  but  to  belittle  it, 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  2 1 1 

and  to  drive  men  who  are  humbly  seeking  to  know  the 
will  of  God  into  revolt  against  the  church  which  should 
be  the  home  and  the  school  of  all  God's  children.  It  is 
to  turn  the  church  from  the  witness  to  the  divine  life  of 
Jesus  into  a  philosophic  society,  whose  mission  is  to  repeat 
words  but  partially  understood,  like  the  Buddhist  "Om 
mani  padni  Om,"  as  if  they  had  some  magic  power.  The 
Catholic  creeds  should  be  an  inspiration  to  a  living  faith, 
because  they  are  the  witness  to  man's  belief  that  the  spirit 
will  lead  into  truth,  and  that  that  truth  must  in  this  day 
be  expressed  in  language  which  to  the  former  days  would 
have  seemed  inadequate.  How  few  of  those  who  reverence 
Athanasius  appreciate  that  he  was  a  great  "radical,"  a 
true  "modernist"! 

But  so  have  been  all  the  great  teachers  of  the  church 
whose  doctrines  are  relied  upon  by  the  obscurantist  of 
to-day.  Such  were  Augustine  and  Anselm  and  Aquinas; 
such  were  Luther  and  Calvin.  "Cwr  Deus  homo?^'  was 
the  one  question  they  all  tried  to  answer  in  the  way  their 
age  could  understand.  And  this  was  what  was  to  have 
been  expected  from  the  disciples  of  him  who  was  the  most 
profound  radical  the  religious  life  has  known.  "Ye  believe 
in  God,"  said  Jesus;  "now  believe  in  me."  How  had  they 
believed  in  God?  In  the  conventional  way  of  their  past 
experience,  and  it  was  not  vivifying.  Jesus  would  have 
them  enter  into  that  knowledge  of  truth  which  he  had 
learned  by  the  things  which  he  suffered.  If  they  did  that, 
then  God  would  be  to  them  what  he  was  to  Jesus,  and  to 
know  God  is  to  know  the  truth.  Jesus  knew  nothing  about 
what  we  now  call  the  "inmaanence  of  God,"  but  he  knew 
much  about  the  nearness  of  God.  Not  one  poor  little  spar- 
row fallen  from  the  nest  and  dying  of  cold  and  hunger 
perished  without  some  sympathetic  emotion  on  the  part 
of  God.  How  much  more  was  this  true  of  those  whom 
Jesus  called  God's  children !  The  world  is  not  asking  to- 
day so  much  ''Cur  Deus  homo?''  as  "Does  God  care?" 


212         THE   CRISIS  OF  THE   CHURCHES 

Does  the  church  know  that  truth  ?  If  so,  it  has  a  message 
which  the  world  is  eager  to  hear.  The  creeds  may  express 
in  metaphysical  language  the  method  by  which  this  truth 
was  made  effective,  but  it  is  the  truth  which  the  world 
asks  for.  To-day  we  think  it  can  be  better  expressed  in 
the  language  of  psychology,*  but  it  is  not  the  philosophical 
expression  which  is  of  primary  importance  but  the  truth 
of  God's  care.  Has  the  individual  soul  eternal  value?  Or 
does  it,  at  the  end,  "slip  like  a  dewdrop  into  the  eternal 
sea"?  Jesus  knew,  and  sent  his  messengers  to  tell  that 
truth  to  a  discouraged  world,  and  the  world  sprang  to  new 
life.  Is  there  an  eternal  home  to  which  the  soul  may  look 
forward  after  the  long  wandering,  where  there  will  be  par- 
don and  love,  recognition  and  peace?  Jesus  was  in  no 
doubt  about  it,  and  there  were  seen  a  "new  heaven  and  a 
new  earth."  How  was  this  great  work  done?  Was  it  by 
creeds  and  councils?  We  know  that  it  was  revealed  in 
the  lives  of  simple  folk  who  received  it  and  lived  in  it,  and 
so  revealed  it  and  convinced  the  world  of  the  truth  which 
not  the  learned  nor  the  wise  but  the  simple  were  able  to 
understand.  "Christianity  rose  and  spread  among  men," 
says  Carlyle,  "in  the  mystic  deeps  of  man's  soul,  and  was 
spread  by  the  *  preaching  of  the  word'  by  simple,  altogether 
natural  and  individual  efforts;  and  flew,  like  hallowed 
fire,  from  heart  to  heart,  till  all  were  purified  and  illumi- 
nated by  it."  t 

"Simple  faith  still  shows  the  way 
We  lose  by  chart  of  creeds. '* 

That  the  truth  would  be  more  effective  if  it  were  illus- 
trated by  the  lives  of  "all  who  profess  and  call  themselves 
Christians"  is  undoubtedly  true,  but  to  suppose  that  this 
would  result  from  the  corporate  unity  of  the  church  is  to 
misread  history.    Whenever  the  church  as  a  whole,  or  any 

*  I  think  this  was  first  said  by  Archbishop  Temple. 

t  Quoted  by  Glover  in  "Jesus  in  the  Experience  of  Men." 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  213 

part  of  the  church,  has  claimed  that  it  was  the  possessor 
of  the  whole  truth,  there  has  followed  a  protest  and  a  re- 
volt from  the  organization  which  has  been  for  the  welfare 
of  the  church  at  large. 

The  classic  illustration  of  this  is  found  in  the  Reforma- 
tion of  the  sixteenth  century.  But  it  has  been  repeated 
again  and  again  since  that  day.  The  first  effect  was  no 
doubt  to  shake  faith  in  a  certain  expression  of  truth,  which 
had  been  identified  with  truth  itself,  but  that  was  a  tem- 
porary effect.  The  lasting  gain  was  in  driving  men  to  the 
heart  of  truth.  We  are  seeing  the  same  spirit  at  work  to- 
day, and  if  we  have  learned  the  lessons  of  the  past,  we 
should  see  that  what  is  needed  to-day  is  not  an  insistence 
upon  a  return  to  any  ancient  statement  as  of  permanent 
authority  but  rather  to  the  manifestation  of  truth  in  life. 
That  this  is  being  recognized  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  not 
a  few  ministers  are  losing  interest  in  theology.  Some  are 
turning  to  poetry  and  others  to  economics  and,  in  the  Angli- 
can communion,  there  is  a  strong  drift  toward  sacramen- 
tarianism,*  which  many  believe  leads  to  a  repudiation  of 
the  religion  of  Jesus. 

It  is  not  possible  for  the  uninitiated  to  appreciate  the 
appeal  that  sacramentarianism  undoubtedly  makes  to 
many  intelligent  and  devout  men.  It  is  essentially  an 
esoteric  doctrine,  and  can  be  understood  only  by  the  ini- 
tiated. That  it  has  profound  effect  upon  character  the 
history  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  shows.     It  has 

*  "I  remember  very  well,  when  I  was  eight  or  nine  .  .  .  reading  a 
book  by  a  Protestant  author — a  Presbyterian,  I  think — entitled  '  Father 
Clement,'  about  the  conversion  of  a  Catholic  priest  to  Protestantism. 
.  .  .  The  book  described  confession  and  absolution,  fasting,  the  Real 
Presence,  the  devotion  of  the  Three  Hours,  the  use  of  incense,  etc.,  and 
I  felt  instinctively  and  at  once  that  this  sort  of  sacramental  religion  was 
the  religion  for  me."  ("  Belief  in  God,"  by  Bishop  Gore.)  Why  Bishop 
Gore  should  have  failed  to  find  a  home  in  the  one  church  which  has  con- 
sistently followed  the  sacramental  religion,  we  need  not  consider.  The 
interesting  point  in  this  statement  is  that  it  is  the  heart  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  religion  in  which  he  has  found  peace. 


214         THE   CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

proved  a  veritable  refuge  or  "  gourd  ^'  for  multitudes  of 
mystics  who  ignore  the  intellectual  difficulties  of  dogma 
and  the  moral  inconsistencies  which  have  marred  the  life 
of  the  church,  but  find  in  it  a  means  of  mystic  communion 
with  God.  The  rationalist  may  be  tempted  to  scorn  it, 
but  it  cannot  be  denied  that  one  of  the  causes  of  the  weak- 
ness of  Protestantism  has  been  its  intense  intellectualism 
and  its  lack  of  sympathy  with  mysticism,  and  as  a  result 
it  is  in  Protestant  communities  that  the  most  modern  form 
of  mysticism — Christian  Science — ^makes  the  strongest  ap- 
peal, and  that  the  most  ancient  form  of  mysticism — the- 
osophy — is  wide-spread  in  America.  But  this,  I  think, 
may  truthfully  be  said,  that  while  mysticism  is  an  essential 
element  in  all  religious  experience,  if  it  be  not  interpreted 
by  the  understanding  and  manifested  in  ethical  life,  it  will 
be  destructive  of  the  truest  communion  of  the  soul  with 
God,  and  therefore  lead  to  the  abandonment  of  the  religion 
of  Jesus.  His  appeal  was  primarily  to  conscience,  the  in- 
nate consciousness  of  God.  He  asked  his  disciples  to  pass 
judgment  upon  his  message,  that  is,  to  exercise  their  in- 
telligence, and  the  result  of  his  influence  was  as  has  been 
stated  by  one  of  the  earliest  of  the  postapostolic  writers:* 
"God  hath  not  given  us  the  spirit  of  fear;  but  of  power, 
and  of  love,  and  of  a  sound  mind."  Paul  knew  the  danger 
of  unintelligent  mysticism  which  in  its  earliest  form  ap- 
peared in  the  church  in  the  "gift  of  tongues."  He  did 
not  deny  that  this  gift  had  "signification,"  but  he  did  say 
that  it  tended  to  mystification:  "He  that  speaketh  in  a 
tongue  speaketh  not  unto  men  but  unto  God,  for  no  man 
understandeth  him.  ...  He  speaketh  mysteries.  If  he 
pray  in  a  tongue  my  spirit  prayeth,  but  my  understanding 
is  unfruitful.  What  is  it  then  ?  I  will  pray  with  the  spirit, 
and  I  will  pray  with  the  understanding  also.  ...  I  had 
rather  speak  five  words  with  my  understanding  .  .  .  than 
ten  thousand  words  in  a  tongue."  Sacramentarianism 
*  II  Tim.  1:7. 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  215 

would,  I  believe,  be  rebuked  by  Paul  for  the  same  reason 
that  he  rebuked  those  who  were  identifying  the  "gift  of 
tongues"  with  the  full  manifestation  of  the  spirit  of  God. 
To  assert  that  any  material  means  are  essential  for  the 
manifestation  of  God  to  the  human  spirit  is  to  become 
"entangled  again  in  the  bondage  from  which  Christ  has 
set  us  free."  It  has  obscured  the  meaning  of  grace.  In 
the  New  Testament  grace  is  not  only  a  beautiful  and  com- 
forting word,  but  it  is  also  a  simple  and  natural  word;  it 
means  help.  The  early  Protestant  teachers  wrote  tomes 
upon  grace,  but  who  reads  them  to-day?  They  identified 
grace  with  the  mysterious  effect  of  the  atonement,  but  the 
sacramentarian  is  confusing  it  with  the  material  which  is 
the  sign  of  a  spiritual  gift.  Consequently  the  highest  grace 
is  impossible  to  those  who  do  not  receive  the  material  sym- 
bol, but  is  this  a  fact  or  a  theory?  Sacraments  are  indeed 
means  of  grace  because  they  are  "outward  and  visible 
signs"  of  God's  love,  but  the  material  symbol  cannot  be 
the  channel  of  grace  nor  essential  for  the  communion  of 
the  soul  with  God.  That  sacramentarianism  is  a  comfort- 
ing and  attractive  religion  cannot  be  denied,  but  its  identi- 
fication with  the  religion  to  which  Jesus  called  his  disciples 
is  without  historical  warrant. 

Not  a  few  who  have  learned  the  impotence  of  the  sacra- 
mental theory  as  it  has  been  proclaimed  by  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  and  have  repudiated  it,  nevertheless  are 
interested  in  tracing  its  influence  upon  the  early  church 
through  the  "mystery"  religions,  which  were  coming  in 
from  the  East  at  the  time  when  Paul  was  preaching.  This 
is  not  the  place  for  a  discussion  of  the  mystery  religions, 
even  if  I  were  competent  to  undertake  it.  But  it  may  not 
be  out  of  place  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  those  who 
think  that  modem  scholarship  is  showing  a  current  toward 
a  view  of  sacramentarianism  which  would  prove  that  Paul 
and  John,  under  the  influence  of  Mithras  and  Isis,  were 
laying  the  foundation  of  a  "magic"  religion,  may  find  that 


2i6        THE  CRISIS  OP  THE  CHURCHES 

in  escaping  from  the  Scylla  of  a  "naturaKstic"  theology 
they  will  be  shipwrecked  upon  the  Charybdis  which  will 
reduce  Jesus  to  the  phantom  of  Isis  and  Mithras.  Already 
we  hear  voices  proclaiming  that  Jesus  had  no  historical 
existence,  that  he  was  invented  as  a  rival  to  one  of  the 
many  "redeemers"  who  were  making  their  appeal  to  the 
superstition  of  the  second  century.  The  church  has  been 
so  busy  in  flogging  the  dead  body  of  Arius  that  it  has 
failed  to  see  the  shadow  of  a  more  subtle  enemy,  Apolli- 
narius.  Unless  the  church  can  plant  its  feet  firmly  on  the 
rock  of  the  historicity  of  Jesus,  it  can  speak  with  no  author- 
ity. The  world  is  not  eager  to  hear  about  a  deluded  Jesus 
of  eschatology  nor  of  a  rival  myth,  but  it  would  respond 
to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  the  pure  ethical  teaching 
of  him  who  spake  as  never  man  spake.  There  is  a  modem 
form  of  Docetism  which  "spiritualism"  cannot  combat 
nor  sacramentarianism  popularize. 

The  Anglo-Catholic  sacramentarian  can  derive  no  com- 
fort from  the  teachiags  of  the  "modernist"  sacramentarian, 
for  if  modern  scholarship  should  succeed  in  showing  that 
the  sacramental  theory  was  introduced  into  the  Christian 
church  by  Paul  and  glorified  by  John,  nothing  would  have 
been  done  to  link  it  up  with  the  teachings  of  Jesus.  On 
the  contrary,  it  would  simply  prove  that  just  as  Paul  in 
certain  of  his  epistles  had  never  succeeded  in  ridding  him- 
self of  the  dogmatism  of  the  Rabbinic  school,  so  he  had 
fallen  under  the  influence  of  heathen  teachers  and  at- 
tempted to  adjust  the  gospel  of  Jesus  to  the  mystery  reli- 
gions, and,  therefore,  the  breach  between  Jesus  and  Paul 
would  be  complete.  The  Anglo-Catholic  sacramentarian 
believes  that  his  theory  of  the  sacraments  was  not  borrowed 
from  the  mystic  religions,  but  represents  the  teaching  of 
Christ  himself.  Therefore  any  expectation  on  the  part  of 
the  modernist  that  he  will  appeal  to  the  Anglo-Catholic 
by  trying  to  show  an  early  origin  of  the  sacramentarian 
theory,  so  far  from  conciliating,  will  embitter.    To  the 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  217 

Anglo-Catholics  the  church  is  not  primarily  a  philosophic 
school;  rather,  it  is  a  means  of  salvation.  They  accept  the 
theology  of  the  past  because  it  is  believed  to  be  the  revela- 
tion to  the  church  of  the  truth  of  God.  Some  of  them 
seem  neither  to  examine  nor  understand  it,  but  simply 
accept  it.  The  only  thing  which  differentiates  them  from 
Roman  Catholics  is  that  they  do  not  accept  the  supremacy 
of  the  pope,  though  they  are  willing  to  admit  that  he  ought 
to  be  granted  a  ** primacy." 

One  of  the  effects  of  a  more  eflScient  co-operation  among 
the  Protestant  churches  would  unquestionably  lead  such 
men  to  cast  off  this  remnant  of  Protestantism  and  find 
solace  in  the  church  with  which  they  are  really  at  one. 
But  as  long  as  they  remain  in  the  Protestant  church  they 
will  be  an  alien  element  and  hinder  the  unity  which  they 
believe  they  desire.  They  have  the  advantage  of  being 
able  to  state  their  theory  of  salvation  in  terms  which  can 
easily  be  understood.  They  read  the  words — as  they  be- 
lieve, of  our  Saviour  himself — ^in  John's  Gospel:  "Except 
ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man  and  drink  his  blood,  ye 
have  no  life  in  you."  "Can  anything  be  clearer,"  they 
say,  "than  that  this  refers  to  the  Eucharist  ?  Then  it  must 
follow  that  if  any  man  fails  to  partake  of  that  sacrament, 
there  can  be  no  life  in  him — ^he  is  spiritually  dead.  What, 
then,  can  be  more  important  in  Christian  practice  than 
the  means  to  spiritual  life  ?  And  how  can  that  sacrament 
be  celebrated  except  by  those  whom  the  Lord  himself  ap- 
pointed for  that  purpose?"  They  do  not  deny  that  the 
Lord's  Supper  as  administered  in  the  Protestant  churches 
is  a  religious  rite;  they  only  deny  that  it  is  a  life-giving 
sacrament.  "If  all  that  Christ  wished  'on  the  same  night 
in  which  he  was  betrayed'  was  that  he  be  remembered  in  a 
simple  love-feast,  or,  like  a  dinner  of  a  club,  as  a  sign  of 
good  fellowship,  then  any  one  chosen  by  the  club  might 
properly  be  appointed  to  preside  at  such  a  function.  But 
if  it  be  a  sacrament,  ordained  by  Christ  himself  and  neces- 


2i8        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

sary  for  spiritual  life,  it  is  of  the  first  importance  that 
there  should  be  a  priest  ordained  by  those  who  had  been 
authorized  by  Christ  to  administer  it.  Such  are  they  and 
only  they  who  have  been  ordained  by  those  who  can  trace 
their  authority  back  to  the  very  men  who  sat  at  the  table 
with  Christ  and  heard  him  say:  'This  is  my  Body;  this  is 
my  Blood.'  Those  who  have  that  authority  are  the 
bishops  of  the  Catholic  Church,  whose  ministry  derives 
from  Christ  himself." 

The  theory  is  without  a  flaw  unless  it  be  in  the  assump- 
tion on  which  it  rests,  and,  that  having  been  already  con- 
sidered in  that  chapter  which  treats  of  the  ministry,  need 
not  be  repeated.  As  long  as  it  is  discussed  as  a  theory, 
there  is  no  probability  that  any  agreement  will  be  reached 
on  it.  There  is,  however,  another  way  of  testing  it  than 
by  argument,  and  that  is  by  the  application  of  the  scien- 
tific method.  Does  it  explain  the  facts  of  life  ?  Are  those 
who  fail  to  receive  the  sacrament  in  the  way  which  to  the 
sacramentarian  seems  essential,  with  or  without  the  evi- 
dences of  spiritual  life  ?  If  they  are  not  without  the  evi- 
dences of  spiritual  life,  what  shall  we  say  of  the  theory, 
and  if  they  are,  why  can  they  not  see  their  loss  and  begin 
a  new  life  ?  I  suppose  the  answer  to  the  second  question 
is  that  most  religious  men  and  women  who  have  grown  up 
in  some  church  which  holds  no  such  theory  of  spiritual  life 
are  convinced  that  not  only  are  the  premises  on  which  the 
theory  is  based  unsound,  but  that  if  they  were  true,  it 
would  not  be  the  religion  of  Jesus  to  which  they  were  in- 
vited, but  to  some  other  reKgion  which  is  entirely  opposed 
to  all  that  they  believe  he  taught.  For  when  it  is  exam- 
ined, what  does  this  sacramentarianism  mean  but  a  reli- 
gion of  magic?  A  spiritual  effect  is  to  be  produced  by 
material  means.  The  miracle  can  be  wrought  by  a  man 
who  is  without  the  first  evidence  of  the  spirit  of  Christ. 
It  may  be  received  by  a  man  who  is  living  in  open  sin.  It 
is  true  that  in  the  latter  case  he  may  receive  it  to  his 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  219 

"damnation,"  but  the  fact  remains  that  the  body  and 
blood  of  him  who  said,  "Not  that  which  goeth  into  the 
man  defiles  him,  but  that  which  cometh  out  of  his  heart," 
is  believed  to  be  received  by  the  mouth.  But  if  the  teach- 
ing of  Jesus  be  true,  that  no  material  thing  can  corrupt 
man's  spiritual  nature,  it  must  be  equally  true  that  no 
material  thing  can  spiritualize  him.  If  it  be  answered  that 
it  is  not  a  material  thing  but  a  spiritual  thing  which  is  re- 
ceived, then  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation  must  be 
true.  But  we  are  justified  in  asserting  that  Jesus'  teach- 
ing leads  to  the  conviction  that  no  spiritual  life  can  be  so 
incorporated  into  a  material  thing  as  to  enter  into  man's 
spirit,  except  by  magic. 

It  does  not  follow  from  this  that  the  sacraments  are 
without  value,  or  that  it  would  not  have  been  better  had 
the  Protestant  churches  laid  more  emphasis  upon  them 
than  they  have  done.  They  are  means  of  grace,  but  not 
necessarily  for  the  reason  that  is  often  supposed.  Each 
morning  there  passes  my  door  a  stream  of  men  and  women 
and  little  children  on  their  way  to  mass.*  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  would  continue  year  after  year  if  the  participants 
did  not  derive  some  conscious  benefit  from  the  sacred 
ofiice.  I  think  I  can  understand  something  of  that  influ- 
ence by  an  experience  which  I  had  many  years  ago.  I 
was  in  Milan,  on  St.  Mark's  Day,  and  had  in  mind  to 
attend  high  mass  at  the  great  cathedral.  I  was  late  in 
arriving,  and  the  office  had  proceeded  to  the  part  in  the 
service  where  the  incense  in  great  clouds  filled  the  sanc- 
tuary and  began  to  float  out  into  the  choir  and  nave.  At 
that  moment,  about  twenty  feet  about  the  pavement,  on 
the  great  pillar  which  supports  the  crossing  on  the  south 
side,  I  saw  the  face  of  Christ!  As  clearly  as  I  see  the 
paper  on  which  I  now  write,  I  saw  the  traditional  face  of 
the  Man  of  Sorrows.  The  vision  lasted  several  minutes, 
and  when  the  choir  sang,  "Benedictus  qui  venit  in  nomine 
*  This  was  written  at  Pointe  ^  Pic,  in  the  Province  of  Quebec, 


220        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE   CHURCHES 

Domini/'  I  understood  something  of  the  power  of  the  mass. 
Every  devout  soul  in  the  vast  minster  felt  that  Christ  had 
come  to  them;  they  too  saw  his  face  and  were  blessed. 
The  explanation  of  my  own  "vision"  came  to  me  later 
when  I  considered  the  experience.  I  had  been  for  over  an 
hour  gazing  at  Leonardo's  "Last  Supper/'  till  the  face  of 
the  Saviour  had  been  photographed  on  the  retina  of  the 
eye.  When  I  entered  the  dim  cathedral  and  the  incense 
filled  the  temple,  blotting  out  the  more  evident  things  of 
sight,  the  photograph  was  reflected  on  the  pillar,  as  if  it 
had  come  there  of  itself.  It  was  an  illusion;  but  it  was 
full  of  comfort.  I  believe  this  is  true  of  the  mass.  It 
too  is  an  illusion.  Christ  does  not  "come"  when  the 
priest  pronounces  the  sacred  words.  He  is  there.  He  is 
in  them  "the  hope  of  glory"  and  does  not  "come."  They 
become  conscious  of  the  Presence  which  the  "world"  ob- 
scures, and  are  comforted  for  the  struggle  with  poverty 
and  pain  and  death.  But  the  way  in  which  the  mass  is 
expounded  leads  to  a  belief  in  magic,  and  has  its  roots  in 
an  ancient  animism  in  which  the  "eating  of  the  flesh  and 
drinking  of  the  blood"  of  the  god  is  the  supreme  rite. 
From  this  early  superstition  the  ignorant  are  less  free  than 
perhaps  we  sometimes  suppose.  We  are  now  in  a  position 
to  understand  how  sacramentarianism  cannot  exist  apart 
from  sacerdotalism;  magic  requires  a  magician.  But  this 
is  not  a  Christian  doctrine.  Sacramentarianism  and  sacer- 
dotalism both  existed  side  by  side  centuries  before  the 
coming  of  Christ,  and  the  effects  then  produced  have  re- 
peated themselves  again  and  again  in  the  long  history  of 
the  church.*  But  this  does  not  mean  that  the  mass  has 
no  modem  value.    It  goes  down  to  the  root  of  our  religious 


*  "Though  your  good  works,"  says  the  interested  (Persian)  prophet, 
"exceed  in  number  the  leaves  of  the  trees,  or  the  sands  on  the  seashore, 
they  will  be  unprofitable  to  you,  unless  they  are  accepted  by  the 
destour,  or  priest.  To  obtain  the  acceptance  of  this  guide  to  salvation, 
you  must  faithfully  pay  him  tithes  of  all  you  possess.  ...     If  the 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  221 

nature.  Just  as  the  creeds  are  a  relic  of  anthropomor- 
phism, so  is  the  mass,  and,  to  a  less  extent,  the  communion, 
a  relic  of  animism. 

Protestantism  purified  that  early  illusion  by  the  doctrine 
of  sacraments,  which  are  means  of  grace,  that  is,  helpful. 
The  illusion  is  that  the  grace,  or  help,  resides  in  the  mate- 
rial which  witnesses  to  it,  instead  of  being  a  sign  or  symbol 
of  that  help.  Life  then  becomes  full  of  sacraments.  My 
friend  sends  me  a  book  or  a  poem,  or  even  only  a  flower. 
It  is  a  sacrament  of  his  friendship.  What  do  I  need  of 
that  if  I  have  my  friend's  friendship  ?  It  is  a  foolish  ques- 
tion. I  may  have  forgotten  my  friend,  differences  of 
opinion  may  have  arisen  between  us,  and  I  may  have  be- 
come suspicious  of  his  true  friendship,  and  then  comes  his 
gift!  I  know  then  that  he  has  not  forgotten  me;  I  recall 
all  the  gracious  acts  of  the  past;  my  love  for  my  friend 
is  deepened  by  the  sacrament  which  I  have  received. 
But  if  we  analyze  the  experience  a  little  further,  we  shall 
find  that  the  essence  of  the  experience  is  remembrance. 
The  Catholic  reproaches  the  Protestant  with  making  the 
sacrament  a  mere  remembrance.  If  he  makes  it  a  remem- 
brance, he  has  used  it  as  it  was  intended  to  be  used.  I 
remember  my  friend.  That  is  all  that  is  needed.  If  I 
remember  my  Saviour,  it  is  enough.  For  remembrance  is 
not  exhausted  by  the  recalling  of  a  past  event.  It  is  a 
means  of  realizing  his  presence  now.  No  doubt  Protes- 
tantism has  been  too  prone  to  limit  the  remembrance  of 
Jesus  to  the  Last  Supper,  and  thereby  has  failed  to  experi- 
ence that  joy  which  the  constant  remembrance  of  his  pres- 
ence should  bring  to  all  who  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
as  communing  with  one  who  is  not  far  from  us.    He  does 

destour  be  satisfied,  your  soul  will  escape  hell  tortures;  you  will  secure 
praise  in  this  world  and  happiness  in  the  next." — Gibbon's  "Decline 
and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,"  chap.  VIII. 

This  is  the  true  meaning  of  sacerdotalism,  and  it  continues  to  be  a 
power  to  this  day. 


222        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

not  come  to  us.  We  come  to  him,  whenever  we  remember 
what  he  is.  Such  thoughts  as  these  would  bring  a  unity  in 
communion  which  the  scholastic  theories  of  **  substance 
and  accidents  "  have  broken  into  bitterness  of  spirit  where 
there  should  be  love. 

I  have  said  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  the 
greatest  sect  known  to  history.  Must  we  not  add  that 
the  nearer  the  Anglican  comanunion  comes  to  the  theories 
of  that  church  the  more  sectarian  it  must  become?  Cer- 
tainly that  is  what  many  Protestants  of  other  churches  be- 
lieve. It  must  be  so,  not  because  the  individual  members 
of  the  Roman  or  Anglican  communion  are  essentially 
blameworthy,  but  because  their  theories  compel  them  to 
regard  their  brethren  of  other  churches  as  if  they  were  dis- 
pleasing to  Christ.  The  Roman  Church  is  able  to  show  a 
larger  charity  because  it  covers  many  sins  with  the  mantle 
of  "invincible  ignorance,"  but  we  Protestants  are  debarred 
from  that  comfortable  doctrine  by  a  feeling  of  shame,  lest 
we  boast.  The  world  cannot  be  divided  into  the  two  cate- 
gories of  knave  and  fool.  Anglicans  cannot  pretend  that 
those  of  other  churches  have  not  had  the  same  advantages 
as  themselves,  and  so  there  comes  unwillingly  a  certain 
contempt  for  those  who  follow  not  with  them. 

Come  back  to  the  question  with  which  we  began:  "How 
is  it  possible  that  those  churches  which  are  without  a 
'valid'  ministry  and  life-giving  sacraments  can  have  the 
life  of  the  Son  of  Man? ''    Well,  the  point  is  they  have ! 

It  is  pathetic  to  see  the  difficulties  in  which  good  men 
are  involved  because  of  a  preconceived  theory.  A  good 
and  learned  bishop,  known  to  me  personally,  and  one  for 
whose  character  I  had  high  regard,  was  elected  to  a  diocese 
where  his  church  had  never  made  much  headway,  but 
where  for  many  years  the  religion  of  Christ  had  been  fol- 
lowed as  well  as  elsewhere.  He  began  his  ministry  in  this 
new  field  by  writing  a  letter  to  the  clergy  of  the  diocese — 
which  letter  was,  of  course,  published  in  the  newspapers 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  223 

with  startling  head-lines.  In  this  letter  he  said  that  he 
hoped  to  establish  a  church  in  every  town  where  at  last  the 
gospel  of  Christ  should  be  preached.  Not  long  after  I  was 
in  conversation  with  a  friend,  the  Congregational  minister 
in  one  of  those  towns,  and  he  asked  me  what  I  thought  of 
the  letter.  I  wished  to  be  loyal  to  a  minister  of  my  own 
church  and  tried  to  change  the  subject  with  some  trivial 
remark.  But  he  would  have  none  of  it.  He  felt  that  an 
awful  wrong  had  been  done,  not  to  his  own  church  alone, 
but  to  the  church  universal,  and  he  said:  "This  old  white 
meeting-house  has  stood  here  for  over  two  hundred  years. 
Here  children  have  been  baptized,  the  young  have  been 
joined  together  in  matrimony,  the  converted  have  been 
brought  to  the  Lord's  Table,  the  dead  have  been  buried, 
and  yet  in  all  these  two  hundred  years  it  seems  that  the 
gospel  of  Christ  has  not  been  preached!  Well,  in  God's 
name,  what  has  been  preached?" 

The  bishop  was  not  the  heartless  man  my  friend  sup- 
posed; it  was  simply  that  he  had  identified  the  "gospel  of 
Christ"  with  a  theory  of  sacramentarianism.  Had  he  had 
the  mind  of  Paul,  he  would  have  said  that  the  gospel  had 
been  preached,  but  that  certain  aspects  of  the  religious  life 
had  not  been  emphasized.  That  it  had  been  preached  and 
would  continue  to  be  preached  should  have  filled  his  heart 
with  joy.  Paul  could  not  have  written  as  he  did  about 
those  who  preached  Christ  "for  envy  and  strife"  and  said 
that  even  so  he  rejoiced,  had  he  identified  the  gospel  with 
one  aspect  of  the  gospel. 

There  is  another  aspect  of  sacramentarianism  to  which 
it  is  painful  to  call  attention,  and  yet,  without  so  doing, 
its  danger  cannot  be  appreciated.  The  Protestant  would 
gladly  admit  that  the  devout  Catholic,  in  assisting  at  the 
mass,  does  enter  into  mystic  communion  with  God,  not 
because  his  theory  of  magic  brings  God  to  him,  but  be- 
cause God  is  seeking  him  as  Jesus  sought  for  the  Samar- 
itans who  worshipped  on  Mount  Gerizim.    Nor  would 


224        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

the  Protestant  deny  the  evident  fact  that  devout  men  and 
women  in  the  Anglican  communion  whose  custom  it  is  to 
participate  frequently  in  the  Lord's  Supper  receive  a 
spiritual  benefit,  even  though  their  thought  as  to  the  way 
in  which  the  blessing  comes  is  confused.  Self-examina- 
tion, confession  of  failure,  prayer  for  pardon,  and  the  re- 
membrance of  Christ's  presence  lead  to  peace  of  mind  and 
renewed  spiritual  life.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  is  not  the 
Protestant  right  in  saying  that  sacramental  religion,  with 
its  "confession  and  absolution,  fasting,  the  Real  Presence, 
the  devotion  of  the  Three  Hours,  the  use  of  incense,  etc.," 
is  essentially  a  mechanical  religion,  and  is  deadening  to  the 
conscience  unless  that  be  quickened  by  communion  with 
God  which  has  no  necessary  connection  with  these  me- 
chanical acts  ?  While  it  is  true  that  no  church  nor  school 
of  thought  in  any  church  is  altogether  free  from  unworthy 
members,  has  not  sacramental  religion  more  such  than  any 
other  form  of  Christian  religion;  or,  at  least,  are  not  the 
imworthy  members  in  that  more  conspicuous,  and,  con- 
sequently, their  lives  more  scandalous?  The  fact  is  too 
well  known  to  require  illustration  by  particular  instances 
that  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  in  the  Anglican 
communion  there  is  a  disproportionately  large  number  of 
worldly  men  and  women  who  are  scrupulous  in  mechanical 
devotion  but  worldly  in  life.  Who  has  not  known  men 
and  women  brought  up  in  the  strictest  "sect"  of  that  re- 
ligion suddenly  abandoning  it  all,  and  yet  without  such 
knowledge  of  Christ  as  would  enable  them  to  find  a  home 
in  any  other  group  of  his  disciples?  The  most  astonishing 
thing  is  that  frequently  such  a  revulsion  leads  not  to  god- 
lessness  but  to  a  more  serious  and  earnest  life,  though  a 
life  separated  from  the  communion  of  the  church.  I  say 
it  is  astonishing,  but  only  to  those  who  have  not  analyzed 
the  content  of  sacramentarianism.  It  is  a  mechanical 
religion  and  can  be  practised  by  the  body  without  any 
enduring  influence  upon  the  spirit. 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  225 

How  little  mention  there  is  in  Paul's  Epistles  of  sacra- 
ments! How  little,  apart  from  the  sixth  chapter — and 
learned  men  have  never  been  able  to  agree  whether  this 
referred  to  the  Eucharist  or  not — ^is  there  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel  about  ecclesiastical  sacraments,  though  it  is  full 
from  beginning  to  end  of  the  sacraments  of  life!  Both 
Paul  and  John  laid  great  emphasis  upon  faith  and  the  power 
of  the  word.  That  is  what  the  Protestant  churches  have 
done.  If  the  Anglican  communion  has  any  message  to 
the  world,  it  must  begin  by  acknowledging  with  joy  this 
work  of  the  other  churches  of  the  Reformation.  It  is  of 
slight  importance  that  the  churches  should  be  united  into 
one  visible  body.  The  important  thing  is  that  each  of 
them  should  receive  from  the  others  that  which  each  in- 
dividually has  failed  to  value.  In  order  that  this  may  be 
done  it  is  essential  that  there  should  be  a  truer  fellowship 
among  the  churches,  and,  if  that  fellowship  could  be  at- 
tained, then  we  might  see  the  churches  the  living  power 
which  at  present  they  are  not. 

It  may  be  objected  that  the  foregoing  criticism  of  sacra- 
mentarian  mysticism  should  have  been  accompanied  by 
a  criticism  of  the  hard  rationalistic  spirit  of  Protestantism. 
That  such  a  spirit  did  animate  the  Protestant  churches 
for  centuries  cannot  be  denied,  but  it  is  evident  that  it  is 
no  longer  the  prevailing  spirit  in  Protestant  churches. 
Nevertheless,  the  objection  is  not  without  force  and  it 
should  be  frankly  admitted  that  Protestantism  would  have 
been  enriched  if  it  had  listened  more  attentively  than  it 
has  done  to  its  great  mystic  teachers.  There  probably 
can  never  be  universal  agreement  on  such  a  subject  as 
this  because  men's  thoughts  are  moulded  by  their  tem- 
peraments. Nevertheless,  I  believe  that  not  by  theology 
but  by  psychology  a  path  is  being  shown  which  may  lead 
to  a  deeper  unity  of  spirit  than  has  been  possible  in  the 
past.  The  importance  of  the  subconscious  has  been  em- 
phasized in  our  day  as  never  before;  perhaps  it  has  been 


226        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

oveTemphasized.  Certainly  it  has  been  too  much  identi- 
fied with  the  abnormal.  I  believe  that  the  truth  in  the 
sacramental  religion  which  has  persisted  through  all  these 
ages  and  makes  an  appeal  to  saintly  souls  is  that  it  is  bear- 
ing witness  to  the  fact  that  God's  grace  not  only  more 
widely  abounds  than  sin  but  also  more  widely  abounds 
than  thought.  How  God's  spirit  influences  man  apart 
from  his  self-consciousness  is  one  of  the  mysteries  of  life 
and  probably  can  never  be  explained.  It  is  well  that  this 
great  truth  should  be  borne  in  mind,  but  it  is  not  well  that 
the  influence  of  God's  spirit  upon  the  unconscious  mind 
should  be  identified  with  any  rite  or  ceremony.  "The 
wind  bloweth  where  it  listeth."  The  doctrine  of  baptismal 
regeneration  witnesses  to  a  great  truth,  which  is  that  God's 
spirit  is  an  essential  part  of  the  life  of  every  human  being 
long  before  the  soul  becomes  conscious  of  that  presence, 
but  to  assert  that  that  influence  begins  at  the  moment 
when  a  priest  sprinkles  the  head  of  the  unconscious  child 
with  water  which  has  been  consecrated,  turns  the  truth 
into  a  dreadful  error.  And  what  is  true  of  the  beginning 
is  true  all  through  life.  God's  spirit  is  influencing  us,  "pre- 
venting" us — ^in  the  words  of  the  Prayer-Book — ^long  be- 
fore we  become  conscious  of  his  grace;  but  to  say  that 
that  unconscious  influence  begins  at  the  moment  when  the 
priest  consecrates  the  bread  and  wine  is  again  to  obscure 
a  divine  truth  by  a  "magic"  rite. 

Any  church  which  makes  dogma  the  sine  qua  non  of 
membership  is  in  danger  of  becoming  a  philosophical  school 
having  no  message  for  the  "man  in  the  street."  Any 
church  which  exalts  sacraments  till  they  become  the  ex- 
clusive means  of  grace  is  in  danger  of  sinking  back  into 
the  magic-worship  against  which  I  believe  a  careful  study 
of  the  New  Testament  will  show  that  both  Paul  and  John 
uttered  an  emphatic  protest.  Any  church  which  thinks 
its  mission  is  fulfilled  when  it  has  ministered  to  those  who 
find  themselves  comfortable  in  its  congenial  surroundings 


SACRAMENTARIANISM  227 

is  in  danger  of  becoming  a  religious  club,  and  can  make 
no  appeal  to  those  who  are  looking  for  the  kingdom  of 
God. 

If,  then,  neither  a  philosophical  school  nor  an  esoteric 
society  nor  a  religious  dub  can  do  the  work  of  Jesus, 
what  church  can  do  his  work  and  save  the  world  ?  It  will 
be  the  church  composed  of  the  men  and  women  and  chil- 
dren in  every  denomination  who  are  filled  with  the  spirit 
of  Jesus,  and  believe  that  that  spirit  will  manifest  itself 
more  and  more  in  the  days  to  come;  who  believe  that  spirit 
cannot  be  confined  to  that  body  to  which  they  are  attached, 
or  that  its  work  is  accomplished  when  individuals  have 
been  "converted,"  and  thereby  their  salvation  assured; 
but  that  the  sanctification  of  the  individual  which  must 
be  the  first  work  of  the  church  is  only  preliminary  to  that 
ideal  social  order  which  will  manifest  itself  in  family,  in- 
dustrial, and  political  life,  and  will  radiate  until  the  na- 
tions of  the  world  acknowledge  Christ  as  Lord  and  King. 


CHAPTER  XVI 
FELLOWSHIP 

It  may  not  be  amiss,  before  finishing  this  study  which 
we  have  called  "The  Crisis  of  the  Churches,"  to  review 
the  path  which  we  have  followed.  For  it  may  seem  as  if 
there  were  a  lack  of  unity  in  the  treatment  of  the  theme, 
though  that,  I  hope,  may  be  more  apparent  than  real.  In 
the  Introduction  there  was  an  interpretation  of  an  ancient 
parable — a  parable  which  we  believe  has  a  profound  signif- 
icance for  this  day.  It  was  suggested  that  the  modern 
church,  like  Jonah,  has  received  a  great  revelation,  the 
revelation  of  God^s  goodness  to  all  mankind.  If  that  reve- 
lation be  not  received  by  the  church  and  acted  upon,  it 
will  lead  to  the  spirit  of  sectarianism,  which  would  rest 
satisfied  with  its  own  "gourd,''  indifferent  to  the  welfare 
of  the  world.  This  spirit  would  lead  to  the  destruction  of 
the  modem  church  as  it  led  to  the  destruction  of  the  church 
of  Israel. 

We  then  saw  the  attraction  which  the  greatest  of  all 
churches  has  for  many  minds,  but  found  that  church  also 
dominated  by  the  spirit  of  sectarianism.  We  considered 
the  philosophical  doctrine  of  organic  unity,  and  the  various 
attempts  to  produce  church  unity,  one  failing  because  it 
identified  the  message  of  the  church  with  the  theory  of 
the  sacraments,  which  leads  inevitably  to  magic  and  to 
sacerdotalism,  the  dominance  of  a  caste.  Such  a  church 
can  never  be  the  leader  of  democracy.  We  thought  also 
of  the  superficial  plans  which  seem  to  ignore  the  principles 
for  which  the  various  churches  stand. 

We  then  turned  aside,  as  it  may  have  seemed  to  some, 
to  emphasize  the  value  which  we  believe  the  Episcopal 

228 


FELLOWSHIP  229 

Church  has  for  the  church  of  the  future,  and  suggested 
that  spiritual  unity  could  be  attained  only  by  the  recog- 
nition of  the  intrinsic  value  in  each  of  the  churches,  which 
value  can  be  interpreted  only  by  those  who  have  known 
the  privilege  and  blessing  of  the  particular  church  of  which 
they  are  members.  I  know  of  no  book  which  has  so  ap- 
proached the  subject  since  the  appearance  of  Maurice^s 
''Kingdom  of  God,"  but  it  cannot  be  denied  that  that  il- 
luminating book  was  the  plea  of  an  advocate  who  was 
convinced  that  the  English  Church  not  only  had  its  own 
peculiar  value  but  also  provided  a  full  recognition  of  the 
value  of  other  churches.  But  much  water  has  flowed  under 
the  bridge  since  the  time  of  the  great  prophet  Frederick 
Maurice.  The  story  of  the  kingdom  of  God  cannot  be 
written  by  one  hand,  it  will  need  the  co-operation  of  rep- 
resentatives of  all  the  churches,  and  the  church  of  the  fu- 
ture cannot  be  identified  with  any  of  the  modem  churches 
— ^neither  with  the  great  cosmopolitan  imperiahsm  of  Rome 
nor  with  the  constitutional  comprehensiveness  of  the  Angli- 
can communion.  But,  in  order  that  that  story,  when  it 
shall  have  been  written,  shall  be  received  by  Christian 
men  and  women  as  the  inspiration  of  a  more  glorious  con- 
ception of  the  meaning  of  the  "blessed  company  of  all 
faithful  people,"  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  realize  the 
underl)dng  spiritual  unity  which  never  has  been  broken, 
and  caimot  be  broken  as  long  as  Jesus  Christ  is  acknowl- 
edged as  Lord  of  all. 

The  first  effect  of  this  conception  of  Christian  imity 
would  lead  to  fellowship,  the  sense  of  brotherhood,  and  the 
co-operation  of  all  the  disciples  of  Jesus  for  the  salvation 
of  the  world  and  the  spiritualizing  of  civilization.  The 
underlying  cause  of  the  failure  of  the  modem  church  to 
fulfil  the  task  and  mission  committed  to  it  by  its  Divine 
Master  is  due,  I  believe,  to  the  fact  that  fellowship  has 
not  been  the  goal  which  it  has  sought  to  attain.  It  has 
been  led  to  magnify  the  importance  of  mechanical  unity, 


230        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

forgetting  that  mere  juxtaposition  does  not  necessarily 
lead  to  unity,  but,  on  the  contrary,  may  frustrate  it.  This 
we  see  in  those  unhappy  families  where  brethren  are  com- 
pelled to  dwell  imder  one  roof  long  after  they  have  begun 
to  show  different  gifts  which  they  are  unable  to  develop 
in  the  atmosphere  of  the  old  homestead.  The  result  is 
not  unity  but  bickering  and  hatred.  Only  when  each  mem- 
ber has  been  able  to  establish  his  own  home  with  congenial 
souls  is  there  peace  and  joy.  So  only  can  true  fellowship 
be  attained  between  the  different  families  of  the  common 
stock.  But  if  such  fellowship  could  be  attained,  it  would 
follow  that  there  would  be  a  better  understanding  of  the 
reason  for  the  separations  and  a  mutual  respect  which 
might  lead  to  hopeful  co-operation. 

Fellowship  is  like  a  purifying  stream  fed  from  the  hills 
above.  But,  as  it  descends  to  the  plain  below,  there  is  dan- 
ger lest  it  lose  its  power  through  spreading  over  the  plain 
and  so  becoming  a  swamp.  To  accomplish  efficient  work 
it  must  be  banked  in.  Fellowship  may  degenerate  into 
mere  sentimentality  and  so  lose  its  force.  There  are  two 
great  emotions  which  will  act  as  banks  to  the  stream  and 
conserve  its  power;  the  one  is  fear  and  the  other  love. 
The  power  of  the  former  is  seen  in  some  great  crisis  like  a 
shipwreck.  Then  the  girl  who  had  looked  down  with  in- 
difference or  contempt  on  the  poor  third-class  passenger 
will  stretch  forth  her  hands  in  hopes  of  his  aid  in  the  time 
of  need.  And  he,  in  turn,  who  may  have  cursed  her  for 
her  wealth  and  luxury,  will  now,  when  the  end  seems  near, 
rescue  her.  Those  who  had  held  aloof  from  one  another 
in  the  prosperous  days  of  the  summer  voyage  will  be  drawn 
together  by  the  force  of  a  common  fear.  So  would  Chris- 
tian men  and  women  be  if  they  were  to  face  the  facts  of 
life  and  consider  what  may  be  the  end  of  our  present  in- 
difference to  one  another.  I  have  already  spoken  of  the 
danger  that  confronts  Protestantism  in  our  own  land  by 
the  domination  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.    But  how 


FELLOWSHIP  231 

much  greater  is  the  danger  of  a  revival  of  paganism !  For 
when  we  speak  of  materialism  we  really  mean  paganism. 
Back  of  all  the  allurements  of  material  things  is  a  spiritual 
need  which  must  in  some  way  be  satisfied.  It  will  attempt 
to  find  satisfaction  in  one  of  the  many  forms  of  superstition 
which  we  supposed  science  had  made  unbelievable.  But 
man  has  longings  of  which  science  knows  nothing.  If  the 
soul  of  man  turns  from  a  reasonable  or  spiritual  religion, 
it  will  take  to  table-rappings,  to  consulting  of  wizards,  or 
to  some  other  form  of  magic;  so  dreadful  is  the  loneliness 
of  a  soul  without  any  spiritual  communion  with  life  greater 
than  its  own !  There  is  need  of  full  fellowship  among  those 
who  are  followers  of  Jesus  if  effective  witness  is  to  be  borne 
to  the  power  of  the  gospel. 

But  fear  alone  will  not  suffice;  there  is  need  of  a  nobler 
emotion,  which  is  love.  So  John  felt  when  he  wrote  that 
if  we  had  fellowship,  the  "blood  of  Jesus  Christ  would 
cleanse  us  from  all  sin."  No  doubt  the  words  have  become 
so  associated  with  certain  theories  of  the  dogma  of  the 
atonement  that  they  fail  to  move  us  as  they  moved  those 
who  first  heard  them.  But  surely  the  underlying  thought 
should  not  be  hard  for  us  to  grasp.  It  is  the  thought  of 
gratitude  to  a  redeemer.  Think  of  men  taken  captive  in  the 
days  when  John  wrote,  or  think  of  those  taken  captive  in  the 
late  war;  we  may  imagine  three  of  them,  differing  in  tem- 
perament, education,  and  material  advantages.  But  their 
fate  is  the  same.  To  them  comes  one  who,  at  the  risk  of 
his  life,  sets  them  free.  They  come  forth  from  their  dun- 
geon and  start  on  the  way  home.  They  know  that  he  who 
set  them  free  has  died.  He  died  for  them;  he  paid  for  their 
freedom  with  his  blood,  he  redeemed  them;  they  are  now 
his,  and  must  devote  their  lives  to  the  work  which  he  had 
most  at  heart.  Their  temperamental  differences  will  not 
have  been  changed  by  this  great  experience,  but  they  will 
know  that  they  were  redeemed  because  he  who  died  for 
them  loved  each  of  them  for  himself  as  he  was.    Their 


232        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

differences  will  not  divide  them;  they  will  be  bound  to- 
gether by  the  memory  of  what  he  has  done  for  them. 

Is  there  need  to  amplify  the  thought?  It  should  be  the 
prevailing  thought  whenever  Christians  think  of  one  an- 
other. And  if  that  were  the  prevailing  thought,  there 
would  inevitably  be  fellowship. 

Fear — and  who  can  fail  to  fear  who  sees  the  signs  of  the 
times? — and  love — and  who  can  fail  to  love  who  remem- 
bers what  it  has  cost  to  redeem  his  soul? — will  lead  to 
co-operation,  that  the  work  of  the  Saviour  may  be  accom- 
plished. 

Such  thoughts  go  to  the  root  of  the  matter,  and  could 
we  continue  in  that  mood,  I  doubt  not  that  a  great  revolu- 
tion would  be  effected.  But  on  reflection,  both  Catholic 
and  Evangelical  will  protest  that  something  of  importance 
has  been  overlooked.  The  one  identifies  the  gospel  with 
the  decisions  of  the  council,  and  the  other  with  the  dog- 
matic theology  of  the  Reformation  period.  "Are  these," 
it  will  be  asked,  "to  be  abandoned?"  They  need  not  be 
abandoned;  all  that  is  necessary  is  that  it  should  not  be 
insisted  that  they  are  the  final  statements  of  truth.  Why 
is  there  such  enthusiasm  for  truth  in  every  department  of 
life  except  in  religion  ?  Men  and  women  are  devoting  their 
lives  to  it  as  truly  to-day  as  in  the  days  of  the  apostles. 
They  are  denying  themselves  the  prizes  of  the  world  in 
order  that  they  may  learn.  If  the  church  were  to  set  truth 
as  a  goal  to  be  won  rather  than  as  an  end  from  which  there 
can  be  no  advance,  there  might  be  a  revival  of  the  love  of 
truth  which  the  churches  seem  to  have  lost.  What  did 
Jesus  know  about  God?  What  did  he  know  about  him- 
self ?  What  did  he  know  about  man  ?  These  are  the  things 
men  are  interested  in.  It  is  well  to  remember  what  the 
great  teachers  of  the  church  in  the  past  have  said,  but  it 
is  better  to  know  what  Jesus  was.  Those  who  suppose 
that  the  day  will  ever  come  when  all  men  will  agree  upon 
infallible  formulas  as  expressions  of  the  truth  of  God  are 


FELLOWSHIP  233 

deceiving  themselves  and  wasting  time  already  too  short. 
Tiiere  is  but  one  infallible  test  of  truth,  and  that  is  life. 
"Ey  their  fruits  shall  ye  know  them."  "If  any  man  wiU 
do  the  will  of  God,  he  shall  know  of  the  doctrine."  So 
said  Jesus.  When  the  churches  are  willing  to  say  the  same 
there  will  be  a  revival  of  enthusiasm. 

"But  will  not  this  be  the  destruction  of  unity?"  It 
will  be  the  destruction  of  uniformity,  but  it  may  be  the 
beginning  of  unity.  For  there  is  unity  in  search  as  well 
as  in  possession.  There  was  unity  of  search  in  the  Middle 
Ages  when  students  from  all  parts  of  Europe  flocked  to 
Paris  and  Oxford  and  Padua  and  Bologna.  Had  there 
been  uniformity  of  teaching,  the  students  would  have  re- 
mained at  home.  There  was  no  uniformity,  but  there 
was  tlie  unity  of  search,  which  was  an  evidence  of  faith 
that  truth  might  be  known. 

As  the  pragmatic  test  was  applied  to  the  theories  of  the 
different  teachers,  the  ones  that  failed  to  meet  the  test 
were  outgrown.  And  as  a  result  of  that  process  of  elimina- 
tion there  is  to-day  a  firmer  conviction  of  those  truths 
which  have  stood  the  test  than  there  could  have  been  had 
they  been  accepted  on  authority.  There  is  less  freedom 
of  thought  in  some  of  the  modern  churches  than  there  was 
in  the  mediaeval  church  when  the  great  universities  were 
thronged  with  students.  Into  the  great  melting-pot  of 
the  universities  went  the  seekers  after  God  and  out  of  it 
came  the  great  teachers  of  the  churches. 

What  is  true  of  dogma  is  also  true  of  discipline.  One 
of  the  reproaches  most  frequently  made  against  the  Protes- 
tant churches  is  that  they  are  without  discipline,  and  that 
this  is  due  to  their  divisions.  It  is  not  due  to  their  divi- 
sions; it  is  due  to  their  sectarianism.  There  is  great  need 
of  imity  of  discipline,  but  discipline  must  be  the  effect  not 
of  prejudice  but  of  the  mind  of  Christ. 

Fellowship  is  a  deep  spiritual  experience.  It  is  a  divine 
emotion,  and  it  leads  to  a  desire  for  companionship  and 


234        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

co-operation.    I  may  be  far  from  wishing  to  live  in  the 

same  house  with  my  friend  and  adjust  my  life  to  all  his 
peculiarities,  but  if  he  is  indeed  my  friend,  I  love  him  and 
desire  to  know  him  more  and  more;  I  long  for  his  com- 
panionship and  listen  to  his  counsel,  and  rejoice  in  his 
prosperity  and  suffer  in  his  sorrow. 

This  is  the  spirit  which  should  animate  the  churches. 
Each  is  too  ignorant  of  what  the  other  is  doing;  they  look 
at  one  another  from  without,  and  do  not  enter  into  the 
spirit  of  one  another.  If  they  did,  then  indeed  we  might 
see  the  unity  for  which  our  Saviour  prayed.  When  we 
experience  it  in  those  fellowships  which  we  already  have, 
with  intelligent,  devout  Roman  Catholics,  with  earnest 
and  reverent  Methodists,  with  Unitarians,  who  cannot 
say  as  we  delight  to  say,  "Lord,  Lord,"  but  are  doing  the 
will  of  the  Father  in  Heaven,  we  know  what  fellowship 
means.  But  it  is  exceptional.  There  are  many  Christian 
men  and  women  who  simply  cannot  enter  into  spiritual 
fellowship  with  any  save  those  who  agree  with  them  in 
the  statement  of  their  faith,  in  the  manner  of  worship, 
and  in  the  form  of  ministry  without  which  they  cannot 
believe  that  the  spirit  of  God  can  dwell  with  man.  The 
archbishop  in  the  Letter  of  the  Lambeth  Conference  has 
well  said  that  the  first  thing  needed  is  "repentance."  But 
if  by  "repentance"  is  meant  the  acknowledgment  on  the 
part  of  the  various  Protestant  churches  that  they  and 
their  fathers  have  sinned  in  departing  from  the  historic 
order,  then  those  who  think  that  they  have  held  to  it  must 
also  repent  the  separation  from  the  Church  of  Rome.  But 
that  means  that  we  are  to  say  that  for  four  hundred  years 
the  spirit  of  God  has  not  guided  the  hearts  of  his  faithful 
people.  This  would  not  be  repentance;  it  would  be  blas- 
phemy !  Repentance  is  indeed  the  one  thing  needed.  But 
it  is  repentance  in  the  sense  in  which  the  word  was  first 
used.  It  means  a  change  of  mind,  to  set  before  oneself 
a  new  ideal.    We  should  repent  our  unfaithfulness,  not  our 


FELLOWSHIP  235 

separations.  We  should  repent  our  lack  of  fellowship. 
This  might  be  the  beginning  of  a  new  way,  a  way  that 
would  lead  to  that  spiritual  unity  for  which  our  Saviour 
prayed,  which  would  manifest  itself  in  co-operation  for 
the  accomplishment  of  the  work  to  which  the  church  in 
this  day  is  called.  Such  co-operation  would  be  the  means 
to  manifesting  the  inherent  power  of  the  church. 

There  is  wide-spread  scepticism  of  the  power  of  the 
church.  When,  therefore,  it  is  suggested  that  the  great 
work,  which  all  admit  must  be  done,  in  the  evangelization 
of  the  world,  the  pacification  of  the  nations,  the  sanctifica- 
tion  of  patriotism,  the  purification  of  politics,  the  humaniz- 
ing of  industry,  the  salvation  of  the  family,  and  the  Chris- 
tianizing of  education,  depends  upon  the  church,  there  are 
not  a  lew  who  will  say  that  this  is  to  put  too  great  a  bur- 
den upon  the  church;  that  the  work  of  the  church  is  the 
conversion  of  the  individual,  and  that  all  these  needed 
reforms  must  be  left  to  other  agencies.  *'The  church  has 
not  the  power  to  do  what  it  has  here  been  suggested  it 
should  do;  such  suggestions  only  serve  to  discourage  when 
what  is  needed  is  encouragement."  But  how  is  courage 
engendered  ?  Is  it  by  making  light  of  the  task,  or  by 
showing  plainly  the  immense  difficulties  to  be  overcome  ? 
The  latter  was  the  faith  of  Garibaldi  when  he  set  out  on 
his  desperate  campaign  for  the  freedom  of  Rome.  *  ^  Come '  * 
(said  Garibaldi  to  the  men  of  the  Valtelline) .*  "He  who 
stays  at  home  is  a  coward.  I  promise  you  weariness,  hard- 
ship, and  battles.  But  we  will  conquer  or  die."  He  set 
before  his  men  the  dangers  to  be  encountered  and  the 
difficulties  to  be  overcome,  and  thus  stirred  their  hearts  to 
noble  deeds.  So  were  the  hearts  of  the  American  troops 
stirred  when  they  were  called  upon  to  face  the  machine- 
guns  in  the  Argonne.  Is  the  courage  of  Christians  less? 
It  may  be  said:  "Their  courage  is  not  less,  but  they  are 

*"Gambetta  and  the  Thousand,"  George  Macaulay  Trevelyan, 
p.  107. 


236        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

not  called  upon  to  do  these  things  to  which  attention  has 
been  called.  These  should  be  left  to  experts."  The  de- 
tails should  be  left  to  experts,  but  it  is  the  church  which 
must  arouse  the  country  to  the  need,  or  it  will  be  left  to 
those  who  have  some  sinister  motive  which  may  prevent 
the  accomplishment  of  the  great  reforms.  How  often  have 
we  seen  good  men  arrayed  against  a  reform  because  they 
have  been  persuaded  that  its  success  would  interfere  witi 
the  hopes  of  the  party  with  which  they  are  allied. 

Some  may  be  found  to  say  that  the  Christianization  of 
the  world  must  be  the  result  of  the  gradual  advance  of 
civilization,  but  that  need  not  be  considered.  It  rests  upon 
an  assumption  which  will  not  bear  examination,  which  is 
that  civilization  itself  is  Christian.  Nor  can  the  peace  of 
the  world  be  left  to  diplomats.  That  has  been  tried  and 
we  all  know  the  result.  Disarmament,  which  perhaps  is 
the  most  important  and  the  most  immediate  step  to  be 
taken  for  the  establishment  of  peace,  must  indeed  be  left 
to  those  who  are  fitted  by  training  to  deal  with  the  details, 
but  unless  the  followers  of  the  Prince  of  Peace  are  instant 
in  season  and  out  of  season  it  will  be  found  that  this  at- 
tempt, like  the  Congress  of  Vienna  and  the  Council  of 
Versailles  will  end  in  disappointment  and  increased  suspi- 
cion. But  who  can  doubt  that  if  all  the  churches  were  to 
unite  in  preaching  a  crusade  against  the  savage  arming  of 
the  world,  the  governments  of  the  world  would  be  com- 
pelled to  obey?  We  sometimes  hear  it  said  that  the 
reason  why  so  many  efforts  to  establish  peace  have  failed 
is  because  the  voice  of  the  people  has  not  been  heard. 
But  what  people?  The  notion  iJiat  the  "people"  can  be 
trusted  to  keep  the  peace  is  not  justified  by  the  facts  of 
history.  The  "people"  reigned  in  France  after  the  Revo- 
lution as  they  do  in  Russia  to-day,  but  did  that  bring  peace  ? 
No;  it  is  Christian  people  to  whom  the  world  must  look  if 
it  would  not  be  engulfed  in  a  new  war. 

The  same  truth  appears  when  we  turn  to  the  industrial 


FELLOWSHIP  237 

war.  No  change  in  the  economic  methods  of  conducting 
the  business  of  the  world  will  avail  to  bring  peace  at  home, 
for  covetousness  is  too  strong  a  passion.  It  is  only  the 
church  which  can  convince  the  world  that  its  misery  is  the 
result  of  the  violation  of  the  fundamental  law  of  human 
brotherhood.  The  same  is  true  of  the  purification  of  poli- 
tics, and  the  education  of  the  young,  and  the  sanctification 
of  the  family.  All  these  depend  upon  the  application  of 
the  principles  revealed  by  Jesus,  and  only  the  disciples  of 
Jesus  can  convince  men  that  these  are  essential.  And  this 
leads  to  a  recognition  of  the  importance  of  a  revival  of  the 
primary  work  of  Jesus'  ministry,  and  the  appreciation  of 
what  it  means  in  our  day.  Conversion  may  not  be  a  pop- 
ular word  in  the  churches  to-day,  but  it  is  a  fundamental 
word.  The  kingdom  of  God  cannot  come  until  men  have 
changed  their  minds,  without  which  there  can  be  no  con- 
version. The  first  step  must  be  in  the  change  of  mind  con- 
cerning personal  holiness  or,  rather,  personal  sin.  In  that 
work  the  churches  have  not  been  slack,  but  that  is  only 
the  beginning.  The  converted  man  must  be  converted  in 
every  activity  of  his  life,  and  such  we  know  is  too  often 
not  the  fact.  If  that  could  be  brought  about,  there  is  no 
one  of  the  things  we  desire  for  the  welfare  of  the  world 
that  might  not  follow.  Here,  then,  lies  the  opportimity 
of  the  churches.  They  have  the  opportunity  to  influence 
men  and  women  which  no  other  institution  has,  and  to  the 
effect  of  that  influence  we  can  set  no  limits.  The  one 
hopeful  sign  in  all  the  shame  and  misery  which  has  followed 
the  war  is  the  recognition  on  the  part  of  some  of  the  true 
work  of  the  church  to-day,  as  it  was  seen  by  the  men  and 
women,  the  names  of  a  few  of  whom  have  come  down  to 
us,  who  saw  the  work  to  which  the  spirit  of  Jesus  called 
them  in  the  second  century,  and  so  saved  the  world  from 
utter  destruction. 

But  we  must  beware  of  one  mistake,  a  mistake  which 
the  church  has  made  more  than  once,  which  is  that  while 


238        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

there  is  nothing  in  our  modem  life  which  is  not  the  concern 
of  the  church,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  the  business  of 
the  church  to  dictate  to  state  or  capital  or  labor  or  legisla- 
tures or  school  committees,  nor  any  of  the  other  agencies 
for  the  effective  operation  of  our  complex  life,  as  if  the 
church  had  received  a  mandate  to  supersede  these  agencies. 

No,  the  work  of  the  church  to-day,  as  it  always  has 
been,  is  to  deal  with  individuals  and  to  quicken  the  con- 
science and  inspire  the  heart.  If  it  can  do  that  its  influ- 
ence will  be  felt  in  every  department  of  life.  When  Jesus 
said  to  the  man  who  came  to  him  with  some  trouble  about 
the  estate  of  his  father,  "Man,  who  made  me  a  judge?" 
he  was  apparently  indifferent  to  one  of  the  most  important 
of  human  interests,  property.  This  was  not  the  fact.  He 
turned  the  settlement  of  the  particular  dispute  over  to  the 
courts,  and,  turning  to  his  disciples,  said:  "Beware  of  cov- 
etousness."  And  that  word  of  Jesus  has  been  more  potent 
than  all  the  codexes  of  the  lawyers.  For  it  is  a  living 
word  and  to-day  causes  men,  if  they  be  Christians,  to  ask 
themselves  in  each  case  whether  their  interest  is  in  justice 
or  in  the  abundance  of  the  things  which  they  possess. 

This  should  give  the  key  to  the  labyrinth  in  which  the 
church  finds  itself  to-day.  Its  power  is  proportionate  to 
its  influence  and  its  influence  is  determined  by  its  faith. 

Is  not  the  scepticism  of  which  we  have  spoken  due  to 
the  fact  that  we  are  identifying  power  with  force  ?  The 
power  of  the  mediaeval  church,  as  well  as  the  power  of  the 
English  Church  under  the  Stuarts,  and  of  the  Calvinistic 
Church  of  Geneva  and  Scotland  and  New  England,  has 
indeed  departed  and  can  never  be  revived.  But  the  power 
of  the  Apostolic  Church,  which  was  sufficient  for  the  con- 
version of  the  empire,  and  the  power  of  the  Roman  Church, 
which  saved  the  world  in  the  barbarian  invasion,  is  with 
the  churches  to-day.  They  have,  but,  alas,  do  not  use  to 
the  full,  the  power  which  Jesus  gave  to  his  disciples.  "All 
power,"  we.  read,  "is  given  to  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth; 
go  ye  therefore  and  preach  the  gospel."  .  The  power  of 


FELLOWSHIP  239 

heaven  and  earth  was  given  them — the  power  to  persuade. 
No  doubt,  to  the  "natural'^  man  this  seems  inadequate. 
But  to  the  ''spiritual"  it  is  nothing  less  than  the  power  of 
God  himself.  To  bring  to  the  soul  of  man  a  word  which 
will  awake  in  him  the  response  of  his  divine  nature  is  to 
set  free  a  force  compared  with  which  the  powers  of  nature 
and  human  governments  are  but  as  nothing.  It  is  this 
mighty  power  which  is  being  silently  exercised  by  good 
men  and  women  day  by  day  in  home  and  school  and  busi- 
ness. They  "do  not  strive  nor  cry,  nor  cause  their  voices 
to  be  heard  in  the  street,"  but  their  influence  is  as  univer- 
sal as  the  law  of  gravitation  and  as  effective  as  the  tides 
which  rise  and  fall  without  the  notice  of  men.  The  per- 
suasive influence  of  word  and  example  is  a  power  which 
belongs  to  every  Christian.  It  therefore  belongs  to  every 
group  of  Christians.  But  it  is  true  that  it  is  not  being 
exercised  with  full  power  so  as  to  influence  the  lives  of  men 
in  their  relations  to  one  another  nationally,  nor  indus- 
trially, nor  socially.  It  is  not  being  exercised  to  the  full 
for  the  conversion  of  the  world.  But  that  it  exists  and 
might  be  utilized  so  as  to  affect  the  life  of  nations  is  not  a 
dream  but  a  reality.  We  have  only  to  consider  the  great 
revolution  produced  in  this  land  in  the  last  few  years  as 
the  result  of  the  concurrent  action  of  the  various  Protes- 
tant churches  in  the  control  of  the  liquor  traffic  to  see 
what  might  be  effected  if  there  were  full  co-operation  for 
the  accomplishment  of  other  reforms.  It  is  not  necessary 
for  our  purpose  to  consider  whether  this  reform  was  brought 
about  by  methods  which  meet  the  approval  of  all  those 
who  desired  to  see  the  abolition  of  the  saloon,  nor  whether 
the  embodiment  of  specific  legislation  in  the  Constitution 
was  the  best  means  of  dealing  with  the  question;  still  less 
whether  the  enactment  and  enforcement  of  the  Volstead 
Act  meets  with  the  approval  of  all  good  men  and  women. 
The  point  is  that  the  churches  have  immense  latent  power 
and  that  that  power  needs  the  direction  of  the  best  minds 
in  all  the  churches.    If,  through  the  lack  of  wise  co-opera- 


240        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE   CHURCHES 

tion,  the  needed  reforms  are  left  to  the  fanatics,  it  will  be 
found  that  we  shall  be  in  danger  of  falling  into  the  old 
Puritan  error  of  exalting  a  prejudice  into  a  principle,  and 
so  preparing  the  way  for  inevitable  reaction. 

In  this  work  there  must  be  leaders,  and  the  leaders  who 
have  been  appointed  by  God  are  the  ministers  of  the 
church.  The  problem  of  democracy  is  to  find  wise,  in- 
terested, inspired  leaders,  and  it  is  the  glory  of  the  Chris- 
tian church  that  it  dares  to  say  such  leaders  can  be  found 
only  in  servants.  "He  that  is  great  among  you  let  him  be 
the  servant  of  all."  The  day  was  when  the  highest  am- 
bition of  the  youth  of  this  country  was  to  be  ministers  of 
the  gospel.  The  natural  ambition  to  excel  was  baptized 
into  the  spirit  of  Christ  and  became  a  passion  for  service. 
All  the  Protestant  churches  are  lamenting  a  falling  off  in 
the  number  of  ministers.  May  that  not  in  part  be  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  ministry  seems  to  offer  no  adequate 
field  for  the  energies  of  a  live  man  ?  The  multiplication  of 
churches  leads  to  ministerial  inefficiency.  There  is  not 
enough  to  occupy  the  minister  and  he  recognizes  that  his 
work  does  not  require  the  same  energy  as  that  of  the 
physician  and  the  schoolmaster  and  the  social  worker. 
The  feverish  activity  of  the  minister  is  wasted  in  nu- 
merous undertakings  which  he  soon  learns  have  no  spir- 
itual value.  The  experience  of  one  such  man  known  to 
me  is  not,  I  fear,  unknown  to  many.  On  a  certain  Mon- 
day morning  he  failed  to  appear  when  breakfast  was  on 
the  table.  His  wife  called  up  the  stairs:  "John,  breakfast 
is  ready."  To  which  he  replied:  "Yes."  "Aren't  you  com- 
ing down?"  she  said.  "No,"  he  replied.  "Are  you  up?" 
"No."  "What's  the  matter?"  "Nothing."  "Why  don't 
you  get  up?"  "What  for?"  If  the  church  could  show  its 
ministers  how  great  the  task  is,  how  great  the  need,  how 
sublime  the  call,  could  such  a  spirit  of  despair  take  pos- 
session of  them?  It  is  the  pettiness  of  the  ministry,  not 
its  poverty,  which  chills  the  enthusiasm  of  the  youth. 


FELLOWSHIP  241 

The  question,  then,  which  we  should  ask  ourselves,  and 
so  bring  to  an  end  this  study,  is:  How  is  that  power  to  be 
generated  and  maintained?  There  can  be  but  one  answer. 
It  is  the  result  of  communion  with  God  which  is  experi- 
enced in  prayer  or  worship.  But  how  seldom  we  worship ! 
The  individual  Christian  prays  for  the  things  he  most  de- 
sires, and  the  congregation  gathers  for  the  public  prayer 
and  to  listen  to  a  sermon.  But  how  seldom  we  worship ! 
For  worship  is  the  acknowledgment  that  there  is  but  one 
Life  in  the  universe  worthy  of  the  adoration  of  mankind. 
Surely,  if  that  were  remembered,  the  prevailing  atmosphere 
of  every  church  would  be  one  of  awful  reverence.  Can  it 
be  said  that  that  is  the  characteristic  of  the  average  Protes- 
tant church? 

We  smile  at  Dr.  Johnson's  dictum,  when,  speaking  of 
a  certain  man  who  was  not  approved  by  the  company,  he 
said:  "Sir,  he  is  a  good  man.  He  lifts  his  hat  when  he 
passes  a  church !"  But  is  there  not  a  truth  in  it?  Is  our 
pragmatic  test  of  goodness  fine  enough  for  the  spiritual 
life?  Is  not  the  "reverence  of  God  the  beginning  of  wis- 
dom"? The  "fear"  of  God  is  the  enemy  of  worship,  for 
it  paralyzes  the  energies  of  man.  But  the  reverence  of 
God  would  find  expression  in  praise.  This  the  instinct  of 
the  church  has  always  recognized.  And  it  is  significant 
that  in  praise  we  find  a  spiritual  unity  which  has  not  been 
attained  in  any  other  way.  Our  hymns  are  drawn  from 
every  church;  but  who  remembers  that  "Lead,  Kindly 
Light,"  is  the  song  of  a  Roman  Catholic?*  Or  that 
"Nearer,  My  God,  to  Thee"  was  written  by  a  Unitarian? 
Every  church  can  join  in  the  familiar  words, 

"AH  people  that  on  earth  do  dwell, 
Sing  to  the  Lord  with  cheerful  voice," 

*  It  is  true  that  when  Newman  wrote  this  hymn  he  was  still  a  min- 
ister of  the  English  Church,  but  as  we  read  the  story  of  his  life  we 
perceive  that  he  was  already  a  Roman  Catholic  at  heart,  though  he 
himself  had  not  discovered  the  fact. 


242        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

because  in  such  hymns  there  is  brought  home  to  us  the 
remembrance  that  he  hath  redeemed  us  "out  of  every 
nation  and  tribe  and  kindred  and  tongue.'*  (Why  can  we 
not  add  church?)  *'We  are  his  people  and  the  sheep  of 
his  pasture."  It  is  in  such  moments  that  we  believe  the 
worship  of  God  is  most  acceptable  to  our  Heavenly  Fa'tker, 
as  we  know  it  to  be  most  helpful  to  us. 

Now  every  congregation,  whether  it  be  large  or  small, 
which  so  worships,  we  believe  worships  in  "spirit  and  in 
truth."  "God  is  spirit."  That  means  that  God  is  life, 
and  that  life  is  in  communion  with  persons.  But  we  are 
truly  persons  only  in  so  far  as  we  are  truly  human.  The 
first  step  in  the  establishment  of  personality  is  the  unifica- 
tion of  individual  experiences.  But  full  personality  would 
be  the  unity  of  universal  experience.  It  is  worship  which 
exalts  personality,  first  by  bringing  it  into  communion 
with  the  One  Person  in  the  Universe,  and,  second,  by  en- 
abling each  individual  to  enter  into  an  experience  of  life 
with  which  he  has  had  no  personal  acquaintance.  The 
family  of  God  includes  more  than  those  who  are  conscious 
of  that  relationship.  The  heathen,  the  fallen,  the  tempted, 
and  the  struggling,  are  members  of  the  family,  and  any 
worship  which  ignores  them  is  defective.  An  objection 
is  sometimes  made  to  the  ancient  liturgies  on  the  ground 
that  they  are  "unreal."  It  may  be  that  they  seem  unreal 
to  us  because  we  are  lacking  in  humanity.  But  it  does  not 
follow  that  they  were  unreal  to  those  who  remembered 
what  they  had  been  before  they  heard  the  good  news,  nor 
what  their  brothers  still  were.  To  the  respectable  man 
who  has  kept  the  commandments  from  his  youth  up  there 
may  seem  something  unreal  in  a  prayer  which  implies  that 
he  may  fall  into  the  shameful  life  into  which  he  has  never 
yet  fallen;  but  to  the  mother  whose  son  is  a  drunkard  and 
who  knows,  as  the  son  does  not  know,  the  horror  of  drunken- 
ness, a  prayer  that  neither  she  nor  any  she  loves  may  fall 
from  grace  into  the  degradation  of  the  drunkard  does  not 
seem  an  unreal  or  an  unnatural  prayer.   It  does  not  mean 


FELLOWSHIP  243 

that  she  is  in  danger  of  intemperance;  it  means  that  she 
is  suffering  vicariously  for  the  sin  of  her  child,  and  that  by 
his  sin  her  soul  feels  the  defilement  of  sin.  He  is  as  truly 
a  part  of  herself  as  when  she  carried  him  in  her  womb. 
For  "all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men"  the  church  must 
praV;  whether  in  the  language  of  the  ancient  liturgy  or 
in  the  words  which  come  to  the  lips  of  the  minister  at  the 
moment.  Otherwise  the  individual  experience  of  minister 
or  worshipper  will  limit  the  expanding  love  which  should 
embrace  all  the  children  of  God.  Only  in  proportion  as 
this  is  done  does  the  soul  attain  to  the  measure  of  the 
stature  of  Christ. 

Now  there  is  such  a  thing  as  corporate  experience.  That 
is  to  say,  there  is  individual  experience  which  is  influenced 
by  association  with  those  who  are  of  like  mind  with  itself. 
And  while  that  is  natural  and  helpful  as  a  beginning  in 
Christian  fellowship,  if  it  be  not  expanded  by  a  larger  asso- 
ciation in  worship  with  those  who  have  been  led  by  other 
paths,  the  result  will  be  a  sort  of  provincial  personality, 
which  is  what  the  Catholic  rightly  protests  against.  A 
worship,  then,  which  would  at  least  from  time  to  time  unite 
all  those  who  love  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  would  be  the 
most  potent  means  for  the  accomplishment  of  that  unity 
of  the  spirit  which  generates  and  preserves  the  power  of 
the  church. 

Conferences  and  congresses  no  doubt  have  a  value  by 
bringing  many  men  of  many  minds  into  touch  with  one 
another;  but  unless  Christian  people  can  join  together  in 
prayer  and  praise,  unless  they  can  receive  together  the 
symbols  of  the  death  of  their  common  Redeemer,  there 
can  be  no  real  unity  of  the  spirit.  Here  questions  arise 
which  it  ought  not  to  be  difficult  for  men  of  good-will  to 
answer.  "What  sort  of  service  would  be  most  acceptable, 
that  is,  most  helpful?"  "Who  is  to  administer  such  a 
service ? "  And  lastly:  "By  what  means  could  such  a  com- 
munion of  Christians  be  brought  about?" 

I  venture  to  suggest  that  such  a  service  as  we  have  in 


244        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

mind  should  be  largely  liturgical,  not  because  I  believe 
that  is  necessary,  but  simply  because  I  believe  it  would 
be  found  most  practical,  that  is,  most  helpful.  For  those 
who  are  used  to  a  liturgy  find  it  difficult  to  take  part  in  a 
service  in  which  there  are  no  printed  directions.  Without 
such  it  would  not  be  easy  for  those  who  have  a  formal  habit 
to  be  freed  from  an  embarrassing  self-consciousness.  The 
fact  is  that  the  former  prejudice  against  a  liturgy  has 
largely  disappeared.  As  soon  as  men  found  they  were 
not  compelled  to  conform,  they  began  to  use  their  liberty 
as  it  seemed  best  to  them.*  As  a  result  many  of  the  non- 
liturgical  churches  are  using  a  liturgy,  not  as  a  bondage 
but  as  a  means  of  grace.  The  marriage  service  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church  is  frequently  used  by  other  churches,  and  so 
is  the  burial  office.  This  is  done  in  no  spirit  of  imitation 
but  with  a  freedom  which  is  illuminating  and  helpful. 
These  services  are  often  enriched  by  the  prayers  of  the 
minister  who  is  restrained  by  no  rubrics.  Why  might  not 
the  communion  service  be  so  used  in  such  an  occasional 
service  as  we  are  now  considering?  Numbers  of  those 
who  habitually  worship  in  other  churches  partake  of  the 
communion  in  the  Episcopal  Church  if  they  happen  to 
be  present  on  the  first  Sunday  in  the  month.  This  they 
can  do,  because  they  now  feel  that  the  Puritan  objection 
to  the  reception  of  the  Sacrament  kneeling  has  lost  its  force. 
They  know  that  when  the  Episcopalian  kneels  at  the  re- 
ception of  the  elements  he  does  not  intend  thereby  to  im- 
ply that  he  is  adoring  them,  but  is  simply  perpetuating 
an  ancient  custom  which  appeals  to  the  spirit  of  reverence 
to-day.  t    On  the  other  hand,  those  who  have  been  from 

*  At  one  of  the  great  universities  it  is  the  custom  for  the  preacher 
to  wear  the  "Geneva"  gown.  When  a  distinguished  minister  of  one 
of  the  non-liturgical  churches  was  asked  by  the  pastor  if  he  would  wear 
the  gown,  which  it  was  not  his  custom  to  do,  he  asked :  "  Is  it  required  ?  " 
And  when  he  was  told  it  was  not,  he  replied:  "  I  will  gladly  wear  it." 

t  It  cannot  be  denied  that  not  a  few  sacramentarians  will  not  admit 
this,  but  those  who  are  interested  in  the  authoritative  teaching  of  the 


FELLOWSHIP  245 

their  youth  familiar  with  the  service  of  the  Prayer-Book 
do  not  feel  equally  at  home  in  other  churches  because  they 
are  not  familiar  with  the  custom.  There  is,  of  course,  dan- 
ger that  it  might  be  supposed  by  some  that  if  such  a  service 
were  the  one  used  when  Christians  of  various  churches 
gathered  together,  it  was  implied  it  had  a  sanctity  which 
is  denied  to  the  more  spontaneous  worship  of  the  non- 
liturgical  churches.  But  if  we  turn  to  our  second  ques- 
tion, ''Who  is  to  administer  such  a  'union'  service?"  the 
answer  to  the  objection  will  be  found.  If  what  has  been 
said  in  an  earlier  part  of  this  book  be  true,  that  every  minis- 
try which  has  approved  itself  to  any  part  of  the  church 
is  of  equal  validity  with  every  other  (and  if  that  be  not 
admitted,  then  there  is  no  object  in  considering  Christian 
fellowship),  it  will  follow  that  the  service  contemplated 
should  be  administered  by  the  minister  of  the  church  in 
which  such  service  is  held,  or  by  one  designated  by  the  dif- 
ferent ministers  who  took  part  in  such  services.  He  then 
would  not  be  bound  by  rubrics,  but  might  return  to  the 
custom  described  in  the  "Apostolic  Constitutions,"  and 
add  to  the  formal  liturgy  such  prayers  as  the  spirit  would 
have  him  utter. 

Such  a  union  of  Christians  might  not  seem  to  have  great 
value  if  we  are  looking  to  immediate  results,  but  if  our 
vision  is  *'afar  off,"  if  we  believe  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
not  as  an  historic  reality  which  has  been  attained  in  the 
past,  but  rather  as  a  sublime  ideal  toward  which  we  press, 
then  it  will  be  found  that  such  a  service  as  we  have  been 
contemplating  would  do  more  than  inspire  the  worshippers 
who  took  part  in  it;  it  would  testify  that  we  have  come  at 
last  to  believe  in  the  validity  of  the  ministry  which  has  not 
alone  the  "apostolic"  but  the  "prophetic"  or  the  "pas- 
toral" succession  as  well.    And  when  that  day  comes  the 

Anglican  communion  would  do  well  to  read  the  declaration  which  was 
omitted  from  the  Prayer-Book  in  1559,  but  replaced  in  the  revision  of 
1661.  See  "The  Holy  Communion  in  Great  Britain  and  America," 
J.  Brett  Langstaff,  p.  85. 


246        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

chief  difficulty  in  the  way  of  the  full  co-operation  of  the 
churches  will  have  been  overcome. 

No  doubt,  there  are  not  a  few  in  the  Episcopal  Church, 
and  perhaps  in  other  churches  as  well,  who  would  feel  that 
they  could  not  conscientiously  take  part  in  such  a  service; 
not  that  they  are  lacking  in  love,  but  because  they  are  con- 
vinced that  they  would  be  doing  that  which  their  Lord 
would  not  approve.  Well,  their  prejudice  must  be  re- 
spected. Those  who  are  familiar  with  the  history  of  the 
church  are  convinced  that  these  hold  a  theory  of  the 
church  which  the  larger  knowledge  will,  in  time,  show  to 
be  untenable,  and  wait  in  patience  until  the  truth  appears 
to  them.  We  believe  that  all  the  forces  of  life  are  against 
them,  but  we  also  believe  that  they  are  filled  with  a  true 
love  of  Christ  and  of  his  brethren.  But  while  all  this  is 
recognized,  it  must  be  remembered  that  there  is  work  for 
the  church  to  do  which  must  not  be  delayed,  because,  like 
certain  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  there  are  those  who  will  not 
pass  over  Jordan.  In  time  they  will  feel  the  need  of  fel- 
lowship and  the  isolation  of  separation  from  the  brethren 
of  the  promise.  "In  my  youthful  zeal,"  says  Principal 
Moton,  "I  preferred  being  an  ignorant  Baptist  rather  than 
a  cultivated  Presbyterian,  and  this  (declaration)  never 
failed  to  bring  forth  much  approval  and  applause  from  the 
colored  people  of  the  community."  *  Alas !  the  same  sort 
of  declaration — ^with  a  change  in  name  of  the  denomina- 
tions— will  bring  forth  applause  to-day  from  those  who 
would  be  ashamed  to  have  it  thought  that  they  had  made 
no  advance  from  the  condition  of  the  poor  black  folk  who 
in  their  zeal  identified  sectarianism  with  Christianity.! 

*  "Finding  a  Way  Out,"  Robert  Russa  Moton,  p.  38. 

t  This  modern  and  perhaps  grotesque  illustration  of  the  sectarian 
spirit  can  be  matched  by  an  incident  in  the  history  of  the  early  church: 
"Acesius,"  said  the  Emperor  Constantine  to  one  of  the  Novatian 
bishops  at  the  Council  of  Nice,  "...  take  a  ladder  and  get  up  to 
heaven  by  yourself."  Gibbon  adds:  "  Most  of  the  Christian  sects  have, 
by  turns,  borrowed  the  ladder  of  Acesius." — "Decline  and  Fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire,"  chap.  XXI. 


FELLOWSHIP  247 

But  supposing  a  form  of  service  were  agreed  upon,  and 
the  question  of  the  ministry  settled,  there  would  still  re- 
main the  thorny  difficulty  of  doctrine.  But  here  again,  if 
there  be  a  will,  there  will  be  found  a  way.  If  any  object 
to  the  use  of  the  ancient  formulas  of  the  faith — and  many 
do — ^would  it  not  be  possible,  if  it  be  thought  indispensa- 
ble, to  state  our  faith  explicitly  on  each  occasion  of  public 
worship — simply  to  repeat  the  Gloria  Patri  or  to  sing  the 
Doxology?  But,  indeed,  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  it 
might  be  well,  certainly  at  first,  to  avoid  any  attempt  to 
find  a  formula  which  would  explicitly  set  forth  the  church's 
faith  at  such  a  time.  The  thing  to  be  remembered  is  that 
there  is  implicit  unity  of  faith,  and  so  it  might  be  sufficient 
to  join  in  saying  *'Our  Father,"  and  the  apostolic  blessing, 
"The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  love  of  God, 
and  the  fellowship  of  the  Holy  Spirit  be  with  you  all."  To 
these  all  "who  profess  and  call  themselves  Christians" 
could  say  "Amen." 

There  is  an  opportunity  here  for  the  Episcopal  Church 
to  take  the  lead  which  none  of  the  other  churches  enjoys. 
In  some  of  the  great  cities  there  are  now  cathedrals,  which 
at  present  seem  to  not  a  few  to  be  anachronisms.  But 
here  is  an  opportunity  to  use  them  for  a  forward  step  in 
the  Christian  life  of  America.  The  cathedrals  alone  are 
large  enough  to  contain  such  a  congregation  as  could  be 
gathered  for  a  united  service  of  all  the  Christians  of  the 
city.  The  throwing  open  of  such  vast  buildings  for  a  ser- 
vice in  which  the  churches  of  every  name  would  be  recog- 
nized as  having  equal  value  in  the  sight  of  God  would  not 
only  justify  the  great  cost  of  the  buildings  but  would  do 
far  more  to  bring  about  the  unity  of  the  spirit  than  all 
discussions  of  "faith  and  order."  It  would  be  an  outward 
and  visible  recognition  of  the  "spiritual  reality"  of  the 
ministries  of  the  different  churches  to  which  the  letter  of 
the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  calls  attention. 

The  suggestion  that  a  bishop  could  be  foimd  who  would 


248        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

be  willing  to  use  the  cathedral  of  which  he  is  the  head  for 
such  a  purpose  may  seem  too  improbable  to  deserve  serious 
attention.  But  time  has  done  wonders  and  greater  won- 
ders are  yet  to  appear.  Who  would  have  believed  ten 
years  ago  that  prohibition  could  be  made  the  law  of  the 
land?  Who  would  not  have  been  laughed  to  scorn  who 
ten  years  ago  had  prophesied  that  compulsory  military 
service  could  be  made  a  law  and  accepted  by  the  American 
people  as  the  natural  way  of  meeting  a  supreme  duty .?  Is 
it  to  be  beHeved  that  the  church  alone  is  unable  to  respond 
to  the  voice  of  the  spirit  because  it  speaks  a  new  message  ? 
Already  one  bishop  has  taken  a  step  in  this  direction.* 
Some  day  there  may  appear  a  bishop  who  will  prove  him- 
self a  true  leader — not  backward,  but  forward — and  when 
such  appears,  the  whole  church  will  feel  the  effects  of  his 
leadership. 

But  the  churches  are  not  dependent  upon  the  Episcopal 
Church  to  show  the  way.  Nor  need  we  wait  for  the  move- 
ment to  begin  in  one  of  the  great  cities.  Still  less  are  we 
to  wait  for  an  ecumenical  council.  To  the  average  Ameri- 
can there  seems  something  unreal  to  read  in  an  English 
book  that  an  ecumenical  council  will  some  day  deal  with 
the  problem  of  church  unity.  To  him  an  ecumenical 
council  is  as  unthinkable  as  the  restoration  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire.  But  to  men  whose  church  is  closely  asso- 
ciated with  the  state  it  seems  a  natural  thing  to  have 
great  problems  affecting  the  relation  of  one  state  to  an- 
other— and  therefore  of  one  church  to  another — settled  by 
a  diplomatic  corps.  But  to  us  the  "town  meeting"  seems 
the  natural  way  of  dealing  with  the  interests  of  the  com- 
munity. It  is  true  that  the  town  meeting  cannot  deal 
with  world-wide  problems;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  can 
try  experiments  which,  if  they  succeed  in  one  commimity, 
can  easily  be  adopted  by  others.  If,  now,  in  any  small 
town  an  effort  were  made  by  the  ministers  and  chosen 
*See  The  Churchman  for  June  4,  192 1,  p.  20. 


FELLOWSHIP  249 

men  and  women  from  the  different  congregations  to  empha- 
size the  spiritual  unity  which  exists  but  has  not  been  util- 
ized, it  might  be  found  not  only  that  the  spiritual  life  of 
that  particular  town  was  vivified,  but  that  the  influence 
would  spread  to  other  communities,  and  in  time  would 
receive  the  sanction  of  the  churches.  Then  we  might  ex- 
pect to  see  the  American  methods  of  standardization  and 
consolidation  which  have  revolutionized  our  industrial  life 
made  effective  in  our  ecclesiastical  life  without  the  loss  of 
indi^ldual  liberty. 

Through  fellowship  in  the  light  of  God,  by  worship  in 
spirit  and  in  truth,  by  co-operation  in  good  works,  lies  the 
pathway  to  that  spiritual  unity  for  which  we  daily  pray — 
''unity  of  spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace  and  in  righteousness 
of  life."  This  is  the  immediate,  practical,  and  inspiring 
unity  which  is  attainable  to-day  among  those  who  "love 
the»Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity."  We  are  not  called  to 
organize  an  ecclesiastical  kingdom  of  this  world,  but  to 
follow  Jesus  and  "let  the  kingdom  come."  How  are  we 
to  follow  him  ?  We  must  join  ourselves  to  all  those  who 
in  our  day  and  generation  are  seeking  to  live  in  his  spirit. 
The  first  thing  is  to  rewrite  Paul's  radical  declaration  of 
independence,  so  that  it  will  read  not  "There  are  no  more 
Jews,  nor  Greeks,  barbarians,  Scythians,  bond  nor  free," 
but,  rather,  there  are  no  more  Episcopalians,  Presbyteri- 
ans, Methodists — or  other  denominations — "but  Christ  is 
all  and  in  all."  This  would  not  mean  that  we  ignored  the 
facts  of  life  any  more  than  Paul  ignored  them.  The  Jew 
and  the  Greek,  the  barbarian  and  the  Scythian,  the  bond 
and  the  free,  continued  to  exist,  but  to  Paul  these  names 
described  only  their  superficial  differences.  Their  unity 
consisted  in  the  fact  that  they  were  all  the  children  of  one 
Father,  So  must  they  seem  to  the  men  and  women  of 
the  churches  to-day. 

The  churches  should  be  ashamed  to  continue  longer  in 
the  spirit  of  Jonah,  the  spirit  which  fails  to  see  good  else- 


2SO        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

where  than  in  the  little  company  of  which  he  forms  a  part; 
the  spirit  which,  on  the  eve  of  a  great  revelation  of  God's 
wide-spread  mercy  and  redeeming  love,  is  angry  because 
the  little  system  which  helped  us  is  about  to  be  destroyed, 
but  cares  not  if  the  whole  world  perish  provided  that  can 
be  perpetuated.  There  is  not  one  of  the  churches  which 
is  not  suffering  from  the  general  scepticism  of  the  systems 
in  which  they  have  put  their  trust,  and  unless  they  can 
unite  on  some  basis  which  will  endure,  they  shall  see  as 
surely  as  the  Jewish  Church  saw  the  vineyard  taken  from 
them  and  given  to  others. 

We  have  been  thinking  of  the  effect  of  spiritual  unity 
upon  those  who  are  already  united  with  the  various 
churches,  but  think  how  wide-spread  might  be  the  effect 
of  such  spiritual  unity  upon  the  lives  of  that  vast  multi- 
tude of  earnest  men  and  women  who  are  "waiting  for  the 
coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God,"  and  yet  can  find  no  home 
in  any  of  the  ecclesiastical  organizations.  The  power  of 
the  church  can  never  be  effective  until  it  recognizes  and 
provides  for  the  unchurched  disciples  of  our  Lord.  Such 
a  disciple  was  Abraham  Lincoln.  He  is  reported  to  have 
said  that  "he  had  never  united  with  any  church  because 
he  found  difficulty  in  giving  his  assent  without  mental 
reservation  to  the  long,  complicated  statement  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine  which  characterized  their  articles  of  belief 
and  confessions  of  faith.  'When  any  church,'  (he  said) 
'will  inscribe  over  its  altar  as  its  sole  qualification  of  mem- 
bership the  Saviour's  condensed  statement  of  the  sub- 
stance of  both  law  and  gospel  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord 
thy  God  with  all  thy  heart  and  with  all  thy  soul  and  with 
all  thy  mind,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  that  church 
will  I  join  with  all  my  heart  and  with  all  my  soul.'  "  *    We 

*  Henry  Champion  Deming's  eulogy  on  Lincoln  before  the  General 
Assembly,  Hartford,  Conn.,  quoted  in  "Latest  Light  on  Abraham 
Lincoln,"  Ervin  Chapman,  p.  430. 


FELLOWSHIP  251 

may  think  that  the  great-hearted  President  had  but  in- 
adequate knowledge  of  the  full  message  of  the  church,  but 
we  must  admit  that  here  as  so  often  he  laid  his  finger  upon 
the  one  thing  needed.  When  the  prophet  Elijah  was  sunk 
in  despair  as  he  thought  that  when  he  died  the  religion  of 
Jehovali  would  die  with  him,  we  are  told  that  the  **  still, 
small  voice"  revealed  to  him  the  existence  of  thousands 
who  were  with  him  in  spirit  and  had  been  as  heroic  in  their 
undistinguished  lives  as  he  had  been  when  he  faced  the 
prophets  of  Baal  on  Mount  Carmel.  When  Jesus  was 
told  of  those  who  were  casting  out  devils  in  his  name,  but 
did  not  follow  with  his  disciples,  he  joyfully  exclaimed: 
"All  who  are  not  against  me  are  with  me."  The  great 
teachers  of  the  early  church  declared  that  the  philosophers 
who  had  purified  the  spirit  of  Greece  were  as  truly  God's 
messengers  as  the  prophets  who  had  spoken  to  Israel.  St. 
Augustine,  who  had  been  prepared  for  the  message  of  Am- 
brose by  the  great  teachers  of  Greece,  as  translated  by 
Latin  writers,  humbly  acknowledged  his  debt  to  them  and 
spoke  with  sublime  hope  of  all  who  are  "  Christians  by  na- 
ture." It  is  these  souls  that  the  church  needs;  it  is  these 
souls  which  need  the  church,  and  could  the  church  so  pre- 
sent that  life  which  is  the  same  "yesterday,  to-day,  and 
forever,"  its  power  would  be  enormously  increased  by  the 
recruits  who  would  flock  to  the  standard  of  the  cross. 

We  are  not  called  upon  to  discredit  our  past,  nor  to 
dilute  the  message  of  the  church,  nor  to  say  that  we  are 
willing  that  what  has  blessed  us  shall  be  thrown  away  with- 
out its  incorporation  into  the  larger  religious  life  which 
we  hope  is  to  be  manifested  in  this  land;  but  we  are  called 
upon  to  present  that  message  in  such  a  way  that  it  can 
be  accepted  by  intelligent  and  devout  men  and  women 
who  are  repelled  by  the  obscurantist  dogmatism  of  the 
church,  and  its  insistence  upon  the  eternal  value  of  tem- 
porary forms  and  expressions  of  belief.    But  what  each 


252         THE   CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

feels  about  his  own  church  he  should  have  imagination 
enough  to  see  that  others  feel  for  their  churches.  Then 
the  next  step  might  be  taken:  mien  and  women  of  good- 
will might  come  together  to  quicken  their  spiritual  life 
by  common  worship,  and  in  the  spirit  received  from  com- 
munion with  God  consider  the  spiritual  condition  of  the 
community  in  which  they  live,  and  set  themselves  to  the 
great  work:  the  conversion  of  the  world,  the  peace  of  the 
nations,  the  rescue  of  politics  from  the  hands  of  unworthy 
men,  the  purification  of  the  family,  and  the  bringing  of 
the  spirit  of  brotherhood  into  the  industrial  life  of  the  na- 
tion. It  is  a  great  and  glorious  work.  It  can  be  done  by 
none  of  the  churches  alone.  But  it  can  be  done  by  the 
Christian  fellowship. 

Christ  is  the  way,  and  what  is  necessary  for  communion 
with  Christ  is  necessary  for  communion  with  his  church; 
and  what  is  not  necessary  for  communion  with  Christ  is 
not  necessary  for  commmiion  with  his  church.  This  is  so 
obvious  that  it  has  been  overlooked.  The  purpose  of  this 
book  has  not  been  to  say  anything  original,  but  to  call 
attention  to  things  that  have  been  forgotten  or  overlooked. 
This  humble  task  was  not  deemed  unworthy  of  the  Mas- 
ter himself.  Jesus  recognized  the  value  of  the  obvious 
when  he  said:  "How  is  it  that  ye  cannot  discern  the  signs 
of  the  times  ?^' 

A  few  of  the  more  evident  signs  of  the  times  might  in 
conclusion  be  profitably  considered.  First,  the  failure  of 
the  scientific  prophecy  of  the  inevitable  improvement  in  a 
godless  world.  Science  has  done  so  much  to  make  the 
conditions  of  life  on  this  planet  interesting,  healthful,  and 
prosperous  that  for  a  while  it  seemed  as  if  the  soul  might 
be  satisfied  with  the  things  which  can  be  seen  and  touched. 
But  the  devastating  war  has  shown  that  man's  highest  as- 
pirations cannot  be  satisfied  by  prosperity;  the  soul  is 
athirst  for  the  living  God.    Man  had  become  sceptical  of 


FELLOWSHIP  253 

metaphysical  speculations  and  turned  in  hope  to  the  real- 
ities revealed  by  science.  He  is  now  turning  with  new  hope 
to  the  study  of  psychology,  where  it  is  believed  the  con- 
flict between  metaphysics  and  science  can  be  reconciled. 
This  hope  may  be  justified,  but  it  will  only  be  through  the 
experience  of  the  psalmist  who  found  that  when  he  woke 
up  he  was  present  with  God. 

Second,  the  impotence  of  Protestantism  as  shown  in  its 
failure  to  spiritualize  life  and  to  appeal  to  the  highest  in- 
telligence and  satisfy  the  ethical  aspirations  of  mankind. 
Third,  the  renewed  vigor  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
as  revealed  by  its  gains  in  Germany  and  its  renewed  in- 
fluence in  France.  The  temporal  power  of  the  pope, 
which  it  had  been  supposed  the  war  between  Germany  and 
France  in  1870  had  weakened  and  the  fall  of  the  Haps- 
burg  dynasty  had  finally  destroyed,  is  again  emerging 
through  the  agency  of  the  democratic  movements  directed 
by  the  Vatican. 

These  are  some  of  the  evident  signs  of  the  times,  but 
there  is  one  not  so  evident  but  equally  real,  and  that  is 
the  spiritual  unity  which  the  divisions  of  the  church  have 
not  destroyed.  If  that  spiritual  unity  could  be  realized, 
first  by  the  recognition  of  the  evidences  of  spiritual  life  in 
individuals  in  all  the  churches,  the  way  might  be  opened 
for  a  fellowship  which  would  convince  the  world  that  God 
is  with  his  people. 

It  is  sometimes  said  that  there  is  need  of  a  new  Refor- 
mation, but  this  I  believe  to  be  an  error.  Great  as  were  the 
benefits  of  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century,  it 
failed  to  fulfil  its  promise  by  entangling  the  spirit  in  the 
machinery  of  organization  and  preventing  its  expansion 
by  dogmatic  limitations.  What  is  needed  is  not  a  new 
Reformation,  that  is,  a  new  form,  but  a  restoration  of  the 
primitive  church  by  the  manifestation  of  the  spirit  of 
Christ.    Of  all  the  churches  of  the  Reformation  period,  it 


254         THE   CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

was  the  Anglican  Church  which  most  clearly  perceived  that 
need.*  But  the  entanglement  of  the  English  Church  with 
the  state  made  it  impossible  to  realize  this  hope.  The 
revolution  produced  in  the  Anglican  communion  by  the 
Tractarian  movement  re-emphasized  the  importance  of 
faith  and  orders,  and  led  to  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
meaning  of  Christian  unity.  If  now  we  could  seek  for  the 
unity  of  the  spirit,  recognizing  that  forms  of  government 
and  creedal  statements  have  only  relative  value,  and  con- 
sequently may  take  different  forms  at  different  times  and 
in  divers  places,  spiritual  unity  might  be  attained  and  as  a 
result  the  influence  of  the  churches  be  made  more  effec- 
tive. 

The  first  step,  it  has  been  suggested,  is  to  seek  for  the 
realization  of  the  spiritual  unity  which  already  exists 
among  the  Protestant  churches,  first  in  America  and  then 
throughout  the  world.  If  that  could  be  accomplished  a 
united  Protestantism  could  not  fail  to  influence  in  the 
twentieth  century  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  as  did  the 
Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Too  often  we  think 
of  the  Reformation  as  a  purely  Protestant  movement,  but 
as  a  matter  of  fact  it  led  to  the  reformation  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  to  the  need  of  which  the  reforming 
councils  of  the  fifteenth  century  had  called  attention  but 
were  unable  to  effect.  There  are  thousands  of  Roman 
Catholics  whose  allegiance  to  the  august  organization  can- 
not be  shaken  by  any  protest,  but  who  would  respond  to 
the  influence  of  a  spiritual  fellowship  which  revealed  the 
presence  of  God  outside  what  they  have  been  taught  to 
believe  is  the  visible  church  of  Christ.  They  would  not 
become  Protestants,  but  they  might  become  more  en- 
lightened Christians.  But  the  gain  would  not  be  confined 
to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church;  it  in  turn  has  treasures  by 

*  See  "The  Reconstruction  of  the  English  Church,"  by  Roland  G. 
Usher,  Ph.D.,  vol.  I. 


FELLOWSHIP  255 

which  Protestantism  might  be  enriched.  Protestantism 
has  been  too  exclusively  self-conscious.  The  power  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  lies  in  its  influence  upon  the  un- 
conscious, the  mystical  element  in  man's  nature,  which 
cannot  be  expressed  in  words  but  is  ministered  to  by  sym- 
bolism. 

There  will  open  also  before  the  next  generation  an  op- 
portunity to  come  into  touch  with  the  spiritual  life  of 
eastern  Christendom,  not  by  the  path  of  faith  and  orders 
but  by  the  infiltration  of  the  spirit.  It  has  lately  been 
said  by  one  who  knows  the  facts  in  Russia  that  the  one 
hope  of  Russia  to-day  lies  in  the  church.  It  is  the  only 
organization  which  the  Jewish  leaders  of  the  Soviet  gov- 
ernment have  been  unable  to  destroy,  and  to  it  plain  peo- 
ple are  again  turning  with  renewed  hope.  It  may  be  that 
the  ecclesiastics  are  filled  with  the  vain  expectation  which 
characterized  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  France  at 
the  time  of  the  Revolution,  of  restoring  the  monarchy, 
but  we  are  assured  that  there  is  no  such  intention  on  the 
part  of  Christian  people,  taken  as  a  whole,  in  Russia. 
They  are  looking  for  a  democratic  state  which  shall  be 
spiritualized  by  a  democratic  church.  To  such  Protestant- 
ism has  a  message.  The  dreamy  Orient  needs  to  be  guided 
by  the  practical  wisdom  of  the  West.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  how  much  has  the  West  to  learn  from  the  East! 
Martha  has  been  the  patron  saint  of  Protestantism,  but 
her  bustling  activity  needs  to  be  purified  by  the  loving 
adoration  of  Mary.  Protestantism  has  spoken  "with  the 
tongues  of  men  and  angels";  the  Roman  Church  has 
"bestowed  all  its  goods  to  feed  the  poor";  it  may  be  found 
that  the  Eastern  Church,  in  its  apparent  inefiiciency,  has 
kept  alive  the  greatest  gift  of  all,  which  is  love.  If,  in  the 
far  future,  Christian  people  could  unite  practical  wisdom, 
merciful  service,  and  adoring  love  the  world  would  know 
that  God  had  sent  them.    Two  things  are  needed,  vision 


256        THE  CRISIS  OF  THE  CHURCHES 

and  patience,  but  the  vision  must  be  drawn  not  from  the 
past  but  from  the  future,  seeing  the  city  of  God  coming 
down  from  heaven.  It  cannot  be  realized  in  our  lifetime; 
"the  vision  ...  is  for  many  days  to  come."  But  nothing 
less  will  inspire  us  to  lift  up  our  hearts  and  in  patience  pos- 
sess our  souls. 


«t!il5!S[IVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 

Fic^|«:hediile^  25  cents  on  first  day  overdi^g^ 

50  cents  on  fourth  day  ov^iloe 
One  dollar  on  seventh  day  overdue. 


NOV  12  1947 
l7npr'64JT      ^ 

REC'D  LD 
DEC  16 '64 -2  PM 


LD  21-100m-12,'46(A2012sl6)4120 


%^ 


YC  42686 


935143 


:^ 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  UBRARY 


